Topeka Bikeways Project

bikeways
developed for the city of topeka and the metropolitan topeka planning organization by rdg planning & design and cook, flatt & strobel
the topeka
master plan
metropolian topeka planning organization policy board

Jack Alexander (TMTA Representative)* Bob Archer (City of Topeka Councilman) Doug Bassett (Topeka Planning Commission Chair)* Shelly Buhler (Shawnee County Commissioner) Jim Daniel (TMTA Representative) Richard Harmon (City of Topeka Councilman) Karen Hiller (City of Topeka Councilwoman)* Mike Lackey (Topeka Planning Commission Chair)* Chad Manspeaker (City of Topeka Councilman) Davonna Moore (KDOT) Sylvia Ortiz (City of Topeka Councilwoman)* Deborah Swank (City of Topeka Councilwoman)*
metropolian topeka planning organization/ City planning staff

Loreena Munoz, City of Topeka Office Specialist Tim Paris, City of Topeka Planner II Carlton Scroggins (City of Topeka Planner III) David Thurbon (City of Topeka Planning Director)
project advisory Committee

Karen Hiller (City of Topeka Councilwoman), Chair Chris Albert (USD 501) Alan Apel (Kaw Valley Bicycle Club) Jerry Armstrong (Capps Bike Shop) Brian Austin (Young children cyclists) Barry Beagle (Shawnee County Planning) Richard Beardmore (Topeka Planning Commission) Mickey & Mary Bradshaw (Serious cyclists) Karl Fundenberger (Frye Allen/Critical Mass) Artie Gonzales (Former Bicycle Police Officer) Ralph Krumins (Cyclist) Chris Lipp (St. Francis Hospital) Bill Lucero (Kaw Valley Bicycle Club) Jim Ogle (Heartland Healthy Neighborhoods) Becky Pepper (KDOT) Dennis Pulver (USD 501 teacher) Bill Riphahn (City of Topeka Parks and Recreation) Carlton Scroggins (City of Topeka Planning) David Thurbon (City of Topeka Planning) Jeff Unruh (Medical Community) Linda Voss (City of Topeka Engineering)
e are grateful for the collaboration and insight of the Project Advisory Committee, without whom this document would not have been possible. We especially appreciate the wonderful support, friendship, and patience of City Councilmember Karen Hiller, who chaired the committee and the City of Topekas incomparable staff: David Thurbon, Carlton Scroggins, Linda Voss, Bill Riphahn, Tim Paris, and Loreena Munoz, who helped create what we all believe is a great document that we hope will help the City of Topeka pedal down the road to bicycle friendliness.
metropolian topeka planning organization technical advisory Committee

Barry Beagle (Shawnee County Planning Director) Janlyn Nesbitt-Tucker (Topeka Transit Authority CAO) Curt Niehaus (KDOT Metro Engineer) Carlton Scroggins (City of Topeka Planner III) Allison Smith (KDOT Transportation Planner) David Thurbon (City of Topeka Planning Director) Thomas Vlach (Shawnee County Public Works Director) Linda Voss (City of Topeka Engineering)
Consulting team
The preparation of this plan has been financed in part through grants from the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, under the State Planning and Research Program, Section 505 [Metropolitan Planning Program, Section 104(f )] of Title 23, U.S. Code. The contents of this Plan do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Martin H. Shukert, FAICP (RDG), Principal Planner Dan Holloway, PE (CFS), Civil Engineer Cory L. Scott, AICP (RDG) Christopher Stara (RDG) Jake McGlade (RDG) Tony Montgomery (RDG) Ben Iwen (RDG)
table oF Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 1: Topekas Bicycling Environment ......................................11 Chapter 2: The Market for Bicycling in Topeka..................................31 Chapter 3: The Bikeway Network: Principles and Structure ........49 Chapter 4: Infrastructure Design Concepts .......................................69 Chapter 5: Route Details and Implementation ..............................107 Chapter 6: Support Systems .................................................................195
bikeways
maps
the topeka
master plan
Route 11: Lake to Landon Bikeway ..............................................................................................................................................141 Route 12: Edgewater Bikeway .......................................................................................................................................................143 Route 13: Huntoon Bikeway ...........................................................................................................................................................145 Route 14: Golden Bikeway ..............................................................................................................................................................147 Route 15: 4th Avenue Bikeway ......................................................................................................................................................149 Route 16: Clarion Woods Bikeway ................................................................................................................................................151 Route 17: 33rd Street Bikeway.......................................................................................................................................................153 Route 18: Hillcrest Bikeway.............................................................................................................................................................155 Route 19: Arrowhead Bikeway ......................................................................................................................................................157 Route 20: Sherwood/Elevation Bikeway ....................................................................................................................................161 Route 21: College Bikeway..............................................................................................................................................................163 Route 22: 11th Street Bikeway.......................................................................................................................................................165 Route 23: North Topeka Bikeway..................................................................................................................................................169 Route 24: Lyman/Silver Lake Bikeway.........................................................................................................................................171 Route 25: Hunters Ridge Bikeway ................................................................................................................................................173
Geography and Topography ..................................................................................................................... 13 Land Use .............................................................................................................................................................17 Potential Destinations ...................................................................................................................................19 Existing Bikeway Facilities ............................................................................................................................21 Existing On-Street Opportunities ..............................................................................................................23 Street Typology ................................................................................................................................................25 Network Opportunities .................................................................................................................................27 Existing Bicycling Conditions .................................................................................................................... 29 Topeka Bikeways Network .................................................................................................................... 57/58 Infrastructure Types Applied to Network ................................................................................... 104/105 Detailed Route Maps.......................................................................................................................... 111-173
Route 1: East-West Bikeway ............................................................................................................................................................111 Route 2: Randolph Bikeway ............................................................................................................................................................115 Route 3: 25th Street Bikeway .........................................................................................................................................................117 Route 4: Belle Bikeway......................................................................................................................................................................119 Route 5: Oakland-Potwin Bikeway ...............................................................................................................................................121 Route 6: Southwest Loop ................................................................................................................................................................127 Route 7: 15th Street Bikeway .........................................................................................................................................................129 Route 8: Clay/East 25th Bikeway ...................................................................................................................................................133 Route 9: Washburn Bikeway ...........................................................................................................................................................135 Route 10: Wanamaker Corridor Bikeway ...................................................................................................................................137
Regional Trail Segments............................................................................................................................. 175 Developability Categories ......................................................................................................................... 179 Sequencing Concept................................................................................................................................... 181 Pilot Bikeway Network................................................................................................................................ 185
TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN
introduction
onsider a vehicle that weighs 1/6 as much as you do, easily travels at half the speed of a contemporary car in city traffic, gets the equivalent of 1,500 to 2,000 miles per gallon, produces zero emissions and almost no noise, can be parked outside the door of your destination or even inside your home or office, and makes you healthier. What would you call such a marvel? Science fiction? The answer to our transportation prayers? No its called a bicycle. Now consider Topeka: a city of distinctive neighborhoods and a vital downtown, the capital of Kansas with a rich history and many unique features. A compact city, where most trips are under six miles and most of the hills are gentle. A city with a network of long, pleasant, and lightly traveled streets that take you conveniently to most of its features. An inland, plains city nevertheless defined by water a major river, a scenic system of watercourses, and two large lakes. Bicycles and Topeka are made for each other, and while bicycling does not work for every Topekan or every trip, it can play a significant role in the citys transportation system. This Topeka Bikeways Master Plan is dedicated to making Topeka a place that encourages its citizens to use this healthy, low-impact, and intrinsically fun form of transportation as a greater part of their routine lives. Its primary purpose is to knit the citys neighborhoods and major destinations together with a network of facilities that is safe, pleasant, and comfortable for current and future bicyclists with a broad range of ages, capabilities, interests, and economic groups. In doing so, the plan also recog-
nizes that this network must be practical and affordable to the community, and must deliver benefits far in excess of its costs. It is the unique characteristic of bicycle transportation that it combines utility and experience. Bicycling can be a useful and convenient form of transportation for many trips that are part of our daily activities: trips to work and school, to visit friends, to parks and recreation, to shopping and to worship, and to many other purposes of life. But moving under our own power is profoundly satisfying, and gives us the opportunity to experience the city, to be part of its pulse, and to see our fellow citizens on a personal basis. We know that bicycling for transportation does not meet everyones needs and that most trips in Topeka will continue to be made by car. But a balanced transportation system should offer choices, including the option to feel safe and comfortable using the healthy, sustainable, and socially satisfying means of mobility that the bicycle offers. Why bikeways? goals of this master plan Topeka has completed major projects that are both important recreational assets and the basis for a broader bicycle transportation system. The Shunga Trail a greenway that links many of Topekas parks along Shunganunga Creek connects the citys west side with downtown and has just been extended to the eastern edge of town. The Landon Trail joins the Shunga just south of downtown and continues for 4.5 miles through southeast Topeka, continuing on into the surrounding Flint Hills, and the Soldier Creek Trail serves North Topeka. Other multi-purpose trails are in the planning or early development stages. By
introduction
using streets, levees, greenways, drainageways, parks and open spaces, and other opportunities to expand the reach and function of these trails to serve destinations in the city, this plan can help Topeka accomplish the following goals: Goal one: increase the number of people who use the bicycle for transportation as well as recreation. Topekas multi-use trails are well utilized and have a transportation function, but the overwhelming majority of users are recreational cyclists. A measurement of the success of this plan will be significantly increasing the percentage of trips for a variety of purposes. Chapter Two includes estimates of current and future utilization of a bikeway system. Goal two: improve bicycle access to key community destinations. A bicycle transportation system should get people comfortably and safely to where they want to go. Therefore, Topekas system should be destination-based, providing clear and direct connections to key community features. Goal three: improve access to the citys pathway system by providing connecting links from neighborhoods to trails. Topekas trails are the arteries of its bikeway system, and will continue to serve the majority of bicycle trips. But the citys emerging trail system can be connected to more neighborhoods by judiciously using the street system (and other development opportunities) as linkages. Goal Four: Use bicycling as part of an effort make topeka more sustainable at three levels: global, community, and individual. Trips made by bicycle promote community sustainability in three ways:
Global sustainability. Bicycle transportation reduces fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, helping the city reduce its impact on the global environment. A more bikeable Topeka will not save the planet. But as a great sage said about 2,000 years ago, Its not your job to finish the task, but you are not free to walk away from it. Community sustainability. A good and heavily used bicycle transportation system can help reduce the cost of government by marginally reducing the need for more expensive projects. In Portland, Oregon, for example, spending 2% of the citys overall transportation budget since 1996 has caused bicycling to increase from 1% to 6% of all commuter trips an excellent return on investment. Reducing emissions also helps ensure that Topeka will maintain its status as a healthy environment for its citizens. On a social level, bicycling builds community by enhancing the quality of civic life, helping us interact with each other as people. Places that lead in bicycle transportation also tend to attract people because of their community quality. Individual sustainability. Incorporating physical activity into the normal routine of daily life for everyone from kids to seniors makes all of us healthier, and reduces overweight and obesity rates and improves wellness and lowers overall health care costs. Goal Five: increase safety on the road for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Improved safety is a critical goal for any transportation improvement, and good infrastructure can reduce crashes and in-
introduction
crease comfort for all users of Topekas transportation network. In addition, national research indicates a strong relationship between the number of cyclists and bicycle crash rates. Infrastructure must also be supported by education, enforcement, and encouragement programs, and its effectiveness measured by evaluation. Goal six: Capitalize on the economic development benefits of a destination-based bicycle transportation system. Topeka has many great features that appeal to visitors: the Brown v. Board of Education historical site, Gage Park with its zoo and new Discovery Center, the Kansas History Center, the State Capitol, distinctive commercial districts, and many other attractions. Topeka as a bicycle-friendly community can add to the visitor experience, and attract new residents and investment.
pekas bikeway network at all points in its evolution forms a coherent system that links starting points with destinations. The network is understandable to its users and fulfills a responsibility to convey them continuously on their paths. Directness: Topekas bikeway network should offer cyclists as direct a route as possible, with minimum detours or misdirections. Safety: Topekas bikeway network should maximize the safety of using the bicycle for transportation, minimize or improve hazardous conditions and barriers, and in the process improve safety for pedestrians and motorists. Comfort: Most bicyclists should view the network as being within their capabilities and not imposing unusual mental or physical stress. As the system grow, more types of users will find that it meets their needs comfortably. Experience: The Topeka bicycle network offers its users a pleasant and positive experience that capitalizes on the citys built and natural environments. Feasibility: The Topeka bicycle network should provide a high ratio of benefits to costs and should be viewed as a wise investment of resources. It is capable of being developed in phases and growing over time. These criteria and the system design principles that logically follow from them are discussed in detail in Chapter Three.
the measures of success: guiding criteria for an effective bicycle transportation network
The design of any bicycle transportation system should be guided by criteria that can be used to evaluate individual components and the effectiveness of the entire network. The Netherlands Centre for Research and Contract Standardization in Civil and Traffic Engineering (C.R.O.W.), one of the worlds leading authorities in the design of bicycle-friendly infrastructure, has developed especially useful requirements to help determine the design of bicycle systems. Drawing on C.R.O.W.s work in its excellent design manual, Sign Up for the Bike, Topekas bicycle network should generally fulfill six basic requirements: Integrity (or, in C.R.O.W.s term, Coherence): To-
plan methodology and stakeholder involvement

It was extremely important to structure a planning process that maximized both public involvement and our understanding of the physical structure and community character of Topeka. A Project Oversight Committee (POC), representing city and state staff, bicycle community members, the private sector, and other community interests met throughout the planning process, with an initial meeting on June 3, 2010. Major public involvement events included: Field reconnaissance and stakeholder groups on July 15-16 and July 22, 2010. This visit included initial field work on bicycle and interest/stakeholder group discussions, helping us become familiar with issues and the overall structure of Topekas neighborhoods and street system. Bikeways Survey. This survey, which went on-line in August, 2010, was designed to explore characteristics of Topekans interested in bicycling and to measure their level of comfort with different types of facilities. The survey attracted 1,051 responses and produced an enormous amount of information, helping to frame the directions of this plan. Quadrant Charrettes. The quadrant charrettes were a central part of the planning process. The city was divided into four quadrants: east and west of Topeka Boulevard, north and south of 21st Street. Each twoday charrette included extensive field work on bicycle during the days, and public meetings in the evening to discuss results and concepts. These events occurred on September 21/22, 2010 (Northwest with
evening workshops at Central Park Community Center); September 23/24, 2010 (Northeast at Oakland Community Center); October 7/8, 2010 (Southeast at Hillcrest Community Center); and October 14/15, 2010 (Southwest at Crestview Community Center). During this process, we were able to talk in person with about 100 participants in stakeholder groups and quadrant charrettes; obtain written information from over 1,000 people through the on-line survey; and cover over 400 miles of Topekas streets and trails by bicycle. The results of this process are used throughout the plan, and Chapter Two presents the results and implications of the survey in detail.
organization of the plan

The Topeka Bikeways Master Plan presents its analysis and recommendations in the following chapters: Chapter one: topekas bicycling environment. This chapter examines existing conditions in the city pertinent to bicycling, including determinants of a future bikeway system such as destinations, existing facilities, and opportunities. Chapter two: the market for bicycling topeka. This chapter estimates current pedestrian and bicycle demand and the potential future market. It also reviews the Topeka Bikeways Survey, which provides extensive information about people interested in urban bicycling in Topeka and their needs, concerns, and preferences. Chapter three: the bikeway network: principles and structure. This chapter uses the analysis of
introduction
Chapters One and Two to establish over-all principles that guide the proposed Topeka network. It also elaborates on the measurement criteria presented above to help guide the systems components. Finally, it presents a complete conceptual system of onstreet bikeways, paths, and multi-use trails. Chapter Four: Facility Design Guidelines. This chapter presents the vocabulary of facilities and street adaptations proposed for the Topeka network, based on the citys specific design contexts and street characteristics. It concludes by applying the infrastructure types to the conceptual bikeway network and its various routes. Chapter Five: Route Details and Implementation. It includes a detailed, route-by-route facility program, showing proposed design solution for each segment of the system. It discusses criteria for determining the sequence of development and presents a phased implementation program, along with probable costs for different infrastructure types. Finally, it proposes an initial pilot network, based on serving all parts of the city and early feasibility. chapter six: support programs. The League of American Bicyclists describes five Es as components of a bicycle-friendly community (BFC) program and judges BFC applications accordingly. These program categories are Engineering, Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, and Evaluation. Chapters One through Five largely address the Engineering component; Chapter Six recommends initiatives that support these infrastructure investments to achieve bicycle transportations full potential as part of Topekas access environment.
photograph and excerpt from the City of topekas comprehensive plan, circa 1976.
10
CHAPTER
topekas biCyClinG enVironment
11
this chapter describes key characteristics and features that affect the design of topekas bikeways network, including: Geography and Topography Land Use and Development patterns Destinations Existing Bikeway Facilities Street Connectivity and Types Network Opportunities
geography and topography (figure 1.1)

Topekas generally gentle topography is one of a number of community features that encourage urban bicycling. While not entirely flat, most grades (with some notable exceptions) are relatively easy and offer few hills that significantly challenge a majority of cyclists. Features of the natural environment that help to define bicycling in Topeka include: The Kansas River. Despite Topekas location in the Plains, water is a particularly important determinant of both urban form and the bicycling context. The Kansas River and its very wide floodplain divide north and south Topeka and help create a sense of geographically distinct communities on both sides of the river. Most of the North Topeka and Oakland neighborhoods are contained within this floodplain and have experienced past flooding, but flood control levees and stormwater management projects have reduced this risk. These levees provide trail development opportunities and the nature of the floodplain avoids the steep hills that sometimes mark the edges of river channels. Watercourses. Topekas system of creeks, draining into the Kansas River from west to east, both define city form and bikeway possibilities. The Shunganunga Creek system includes the main channel, a south branch that joins the main creek in Big Shunga Park, and Deer Creek, joining the main channel near northwest of 2nd and Rice link major parks and green spaces together and also form the citys main exist-ing trail corridors. Dams on Shunga Creek in the southwest part of the city and Deer Creek on the southeast create Topekas main lakes Lake Sherwood and Lake Shawnee, respectively. On the north side of town, an improved channel on Soldier Creek, the primary drainage corridor on that side of the city, reduces previous flood risks in North Topeka and diverts drainage away from an older Soldier Creek channel through the neighborhood. The Soldier Creek Trail, between Lyman Road and Garfield
Park, runs along the bank of those old channel. Grades and Escarpments. Most of Topekas land area, within the I-470 south loop and south of US 24, features relatively easy grades, with gentle slopes rising out of the Shunga Creek valley to the south and a moderate escarpment along the south edge of the Kansas River floodplain, part of which is topped by I-70. For the most part, these slopes in the central part of the city are not factors for bicycle planning. Steeper slopes are found outside of the I-470 loop, especially around the two lakes and southwest of I-470 in a sector between Gage Boulevard and 29th Street. A more rolling topography also occurs north of Soldier Creek.
12
1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT
Soldier Creek
Kansas River
nu Sh un a
n ga
k re e
Deer Creek
Lake Shawnee
Lake Sherwood
Geography and topography

13
Figure 1.1
land use and development patterns (figure 1.2)

The primary Topeka urban area that is the major focus of the bikeways plan is an approximate square about 10 miles on a side, with downtown near the center. Despite this apparent symmetry, the majority of population and development is south of the Kansas River within the I-470 loop. Lower density, contemporary residential development occurs to the west beyond I-470 and in the Lake Shawnee area. residential use The pattern of residential development is an important determinant of bicycle network service. The citys population according to the 2010 census is 127,473, accommodated within an area of about 57 square miles, a density of about 2,240 people per square mile. Despite this relatively low gross density, Topekas central core, within the I-70/I-470 loop and west of Adams Street, is a relatively compact, higher-density area. The gross population density within the city is also reduced by a
large amount land devoted to public use, including the Capitol District, the Kansas History Center campus, Cedar Crest, institutional uses such as the VA Hospital and the KNA campus, the ExpoCentre, and other public and institutional uses. In common with similarly sized cities, Topekas residential pattern displays different eras of development, and older neighborhoods built on small lots on a regular urban grid display a higher population density than new, suburban neighborhoods on large lots. Traditional urban neighborhoods around downtown and east of Gage Boulevard and in strongly identifiable satellite districts, including Oakland and North Topeka, are relatively dense, while larger lots characterize post-World War II development within the freeway ring but west of Gage. Lower density, single-family urban residential predominates outside the loop, along the US 75 corridor north of the Kansas River, and around Lakes Sherwood and Shawnee. Dispersed rural residential along section lines fills out the extremities of the urbanized area. Areas with multi-family housing concentrations typically
14
commercial environments in topeka. From left on this page: mixed use redevelopment near Washburn University and Brookwood Shopping Center. Both types of commercial development are well designed for bicycle access. A short trail link between the Shunga Trail and 29th Street connects Brookwood directly into the citys trail system.
have a large number of present and prospective cyclists. In addition to high densities, residents of apartments may have fewer automobiles per household, be younger, and be more likely to use alternative transportation as part of their daily lives. Multi-family concentrations outside of traditional, mixed density neighborhoods include: Villa West area northwest of 29th and Wanamaker Wanamaker Drive district, southwest of 29th and Wanamaker Road to Arrowhead Westport Drive corridor south of 21st Street Northwest of 10th and Robinson Northwest of Huntoon and Glendale East of Gage Boulevard between 29th and I-470/US 75 South of 11th Street, California to Golden 25th and Golden area
Also, different commercial configurations are better suited for bicycle transportation than others. Therefore, we can place substantial commercial uses into several categories with different degrees of influence on the system. Main Street or mixed use urban districts. These pedestrian-oriented districts are very well suited to bicycle transportations speed, scale, and limited parking space requirements. These districts include Kansas Avenue and adjacent streets in Downtown, North Topeka, Westboro Village at Huntoon and Oakley, and redevelopment along Lane Street between 14th and 17th. Lifestyle centers or districts. These projects are sometimes outside of normal commercial strip corridors and feature a number of businesses clustered so that a customer can park once and walk to different destinations. The scale, walkability, and typical business mix of these centers make them good bicycle destinations. Commercial uses in these categories include Brookwood (29th and Oakley) and Fleming Place (10th and Gage).
commercial uses Commercial development, as clusters of services and employment, can be significant determinants of a bicycle transportation system, although trips for commercial/retail purposes typically lag behind trips for other purposes.
15
main street districts. From left, Westboro Village near Huntoon and Oakley and North Topekas traditional town center. The manageable scale of the street and buildings, and the relatively calmed traffic moving through these districts makes them good potential destinations for bicycle trips.
special destinations. Iconic businesses, such as Porubsky Grocery in North Topeka, can be distinctive destinations for bicycle trips.
Linear commercial corridors. These linear districts along major arterials include the majority of Topekas commercial use. Wanamaker Road between 10th and 29th Street is currently Topekas dominant corridor. Other significant commercial strips include Gage Boulevard ( between 10th to 15th, 17th to 21st, and 29th to I-470), Topeka Boulevard and Kansas Avenue south of 29th, California Avenue from I-70 to 29th Street, and Topeka Boulevard from Broad Street to US 24. While commercial development here might attract cyclists, heavy traffic, multi-lane facilities, a lack of bicycle infrastructure, and frequent driveway accesses make these corridors unfriendly for bicycle transportation. Regional centers. West Ridge Mall, northwest of 21st and Wanamaker, is Topekas dominant mall and is a major destination for all modes.
around Topeka, the largest concentration by far occurs in Downtown and the Capitol area, with an extension south along Topeka Boulevard. A major office and commercial center is also emerging north of I-70 on both sides of Wanamaker Road. Topekas major service and civic organizations and hospitals are also significant employment centers.
office clusters Office concentrations often have significant bicycle commuting potential. While office facilities are scattered
16
y Council Approved February 24, 2004

regional land use. Approved land use map from the City of Topekas Land Use and Growth Management Plan 2025.
ebruary 24, 2004
land Use
Figure 1.2
17
104 -
Auburndale; neighborhood parks to the maximum degree possible; and city community centers and YMCAs. The Shunga parks and Lake Shawnee are of course served by very popular trails, but the system should provide access from neighborhoods to these facilities. hospitals and medical facilities, including Saint Francis, the Veterans Administration Medical Center, and Kansas Neurological Institute. key public destinations and museums, including the Topeka Public Library, Kansas Expocentre, the Kansas History Center, the Brown v. Board of Education historical site, the State Capitol, and others. Commercial centers adaptable to bicycle transportation, including Downtown, North Topeka, Westboro, Brookwood Center, Fleming Place, and West Ridge Mall. major employment concentrations, including office clusters, downtown, and the Capitol area.
destinations (figure 1.3)

Residential, commercial, office, and civic land use patterns all influence bicycle network design, but major destinations activity points or attractions that are places that attract people for recreation, employment, civic or cultural life, entertainment, or other activities should be directly served by the system. Figure 1.3 displays the deployment of many of these significant destination points in Topeka, including: educational facilities, including elementary and secondary schools, Washburn Tech, and Washburn University. Elementary schools may be undertaking a consolidation program, producing large, K-8 centers. major park and recreation facilities, including large multi-purpose parks, among which are Gage, Hummer Sports Park, Dornwood, Garfield, the Shunga Greenway chain of parks, Hillcrest, Lake Shawnee, Oakl-and,
18
Figure 1.3
potential Destinations
19
Shunga Trail. The spine of the Topeka trail system extends about 8.25 miles along Shunganunga Creek from Fairlawn Avenue to the Deer Creek confluence on the east side of town. The recently extended trail connects five major parks along the Shunga Greenway and provides access to Downtown along several routes, including Van Buren Street and 10th Street. A planned extension to the west will continue under I-470 and use both trail and onstreet routes to reach French Middle School. Landon Trail. This regional rail-trail begins at 17th Street east of Kansas Avenue, and currently continues about 12.5 miles to SE 89th Street and Ratner Road near Shawnee. An urban gap between 25th and 45th Street in Topeka was filled in 2011, using funding through the American Reconstruction and Recovery Act (ARRA). The Landon Trail is paved to the city line and intersects the Shunga Trail near its north terminus. Eventually, the Landon will extend over 38 miles into the scenic Flint Hills. Lake Shawnee Trail. This popular 7.5 mile recreational trail surrounds Lake Shawnee but does not connect to the rest of the city system.
existing bikeway facilities (figure 1.4)

Existing facilities form the foundation of the bikeway network. Topeka currently lacks significant mileage of on-street bicycle infrastructure (bike lanes, marked shared routes, or bicycle boulevards), sidepaths (paths on public right of way but separated from travel lanes), or cycle tracks. In 2011, it installed its first sharrows and has been coordinating pavement markings helpful to bicycle transportation, such as striped parking lanes, with its recently approved street rehabilitation and resurfacing program. However, the city features a good system of increasingly interconnected multi-use trails that serve both recreational and transportation functions. These facilities include:
Oakland Park Trail. This short park trail begins at River Road north of Division Street and continues around the edge of Oakland Park, linking to Oakland Community Center. Soldier Creek Trail. This one-mile long North Topeka trail connect Garfield Park with Lyman Road east of Rochester Road.
20
Figure 1.4
existing bikeway Facilities
21
that parallels major corridors, and have both good continuity and low traffic volumes. This is especially true within the traditional urban grid between Gage Boulevard and the Butcher Creek (Landon Trail) corridor within the south freeway loop. This system is interrupted by Shunga Creek and modified on the east as streets change direction to parallel the creek and railroad, but trails along these potential barriers more than make up for the discontinuities. Neighborhood districts outside of the central grid, including North Topeka, Oakland, the east side between Butcher and Deer Creeks, and the west side between Gage and Urish either continue the fine-grained grid or at least have continuous streets that avoid major arterials. Figure 1.5 illustrates this secondary system, mapping streets that have both good continuity (at least one mile without interruption) and low traffic volumes. a ring freeway system. Topekas freeways go around rather than through the central part of the city, to the great benefit of both the citys neighborhoods and secondary street connectivity. The dividing effect of most urban freeways is minimized in Topeka. The ring further places heavy regional traffic and interchanges that are difficult for bicyclists to negotiate safely on the periphery. reasonable freeway permeability. In many cities, freeway crossings occur only at section lines, and these crossings are typically complicated by interchanges. The Topeka system was planned differently, with secondary overpasses without interchanges at halfmile intervals. These unifying crossings occur at 17th, 25th, Adams, California Wittenberg, Golden, Indiana, and Kansas. The south leg of the loop between Fairlawn and Adams is more challenging, but Topekas loop is generally possible to move across.
street connectivity and types (figures 1.5,1.6)

Like many Midwestern and Great Plains cities, Topekas arterial street system is built on the section-line grid that dates back to the surveys and land divisions of the Homestead Act. Unlike many cities, however, Topekas street network has two major attributes that make it very adaptable for bicycle transportation: an unusually good secondary street system. While some of section-line arterials (6th Street, Huntoon Street, 21st, 29th, 37th, and 45th in an east-west direction; California, Adams, South Topeka Boulevard, MacVicar, Gage, Fairlawn, Wanamaker, and Urish in a north-south direction) carry heavy traffic that in their current form give even experienced bicyclists pause, Topeka has an excellent secondary street network
Figure 1.6 identifies street types and configurations within
22
on-street opportunities
Figure 1.5
23
its framework. The width and traffic characteristics each street type will generate different treatments to adapt them for bicycle transportation. Of these, streets that most effectively satisfy the six measures of success identified in the Introduction integrity,
street type Continuous Local Continuous Neighborhood Collector Neighborhood Parkway Neighborhood Avenue Transit and Civic Avenues Neighborhood Arterial Urban Arterial lanes 2 2 ADT Under 1,000 Under 5,000 street width (ft) 24-31 24-32 speed (mph) 25 25
directness, safety, comfort, experience, and feasibility are streets with relatively low traffic volumes, high continuity, and adequate width for mixed traffic.
Continuous length (miles) 0.5-1.0 1.5
other Features
examples 15th St.
Traffic control at major intersections, residential and commercial contexts Often borders parks and open spaces
25th St. Belle Ave Shunga Dr Edgewood Ave College Ave Oakley Ave Clay St 6th St east of Branner College Ave Oakley Ave 21st St Fairlawn Wanamaker Rd Gage Blvd Topeka Blvd
Under 3,000
24-32
25-30
1.0
Under 3,000
30-42
25-30
1.0-2.0
Traffic control at major intersections, mixed uses at intersections, street oriented houses Traffic control at major intersections, mixed uses, on-street parking Traffic control at major intersections, mixed uses at intersections, street oriented houses, on-street parking Traffic control at major intersections, mixed uses, no or limited on-street parking Traffic control at major intersections, mixed uses with commercial emphasis, no or limited on-street parking Traffic control at major intersections; mixed uses with commercial, office, some residential; on-street parking where width permits Traffic control at major intersections; mixed uses with commercial, office, some residential; on-street parking where width permits Traffic control at major intersections; mixed uses; on-street parallel or diagonal parking Traffic control at major intersections; mixed uses; on-street diagonal parking
2-4
3,000-10,000
40-60
25-35
2.0 miles and over 1.0-2.0
2-3
Under 3,000
30-42,
25-30
Over 10,000
44-50
30-40
1.0-2.0
Mixed Use Arterial Mixed Use Boulevard
4-5
Over 15,000
48-64
35-45
Over 4.0
4-5
Over 15,000
55+
35-45
Over 4.0
Urban One-Way Pairs
Over 8,000
32-40
30-35
Over 3.0
12th/Huntoon; Lane/Washburn
Downtown MultiLane Downtown Main Street
2-4 2-4
5,000-15,000 5,000-15,000
60+ 55-80
25-30 25
Downtown Topeka Downtown settings
Jackson St 7th St Kansas Ave North Kansas Ave
24
street typology
Figure 1.6
25
their traffic load. On these streets, bicycle lanes may be introduced without affecting capacity or traffic movement. Examples include 6th Avenue east of Branner. Parks and campuses capable of accommodating trails. These uses and site plans enable trails to cross through their interiors without compromising their use. Examples are the VA/KNI campus, Hummer Sports Park, and major parks like Gage Park. Linear corridors that accommodate significant new trail facilities that serve transportation purposes and/or fill gaps in the existing system. Examples are: - Drainageways and watercourses, often tributaries to the citys major water corridors, with banks and sufficient adjacent public or common land to accommodate pathways. - Levees along rivers and drainageways. - Railroads and railroad structures such as bridges that have either ceased operations or have a reasonable probability of becoming unnecessary in the foreseeable future.
other network opportunities (figure 1.7)

In addition to low-volume continuous streets, Topeka provides other opportunities that can help to build a system that satisfies the six performance criteria. These features can accommodate facilities physically separated from travel lanes such as separated pathways adjacent to streets (sidepaths or cycle tracks) or multi-use trails. They include: Potential complete streets. These are streets that are now too narrow for their current or projected traffic load and will require major widening and reconstruction. Projects should include bicycle and pedestrian accommodations as part of their basic design. Examples are 10th Avenue west of Gage Boulevard and Urish Road. Major open spaces or institutional uses with continuous street frontage of at least mile. These include parks, cemeteries, the Washburn University campus, golf courses, the VA/KNI (Kansas Neurological Institute) campuses, and large public uses like the ExpoCentre and airports. Offstreet paths parallel to streets can be located along these relatively uninterrupted frontages. Street retrofits, where streets are unnecessarily wide or have more lane capacity than required to manage
26
network opportunities
Figure 1.7
27
summary of existing bicycling conditions and opportunities (figure 1.8)

Figure 1.8 forms the basis for a map that illustrates the citys existing bicycling environment, serving as a guide for urban cyclists planning trips through the city. Facility classifications include: multi-Use trails. These trails, for the exclusive use of nonmotorized users, are separated from streets, and run along waterways (Shunga and Soldier Creek Trails), abandoned railroads (Landon Trail), and greenways, or through parks. When these trails run along streets, they are widely separated from the roadway. Trails only encounter cars and trucks at surface intersections. Because they also accommodate pedestrians and skaters, they also require special care and courtesy by cyclists. Multi-use trails currently planned for completion are displayed the map, but may not yet available for use. sidepaths. Sidepaths are pathways that run along streets, separating cyclists and pedestrians from motor vehicles. They cross streets and driveways at the surface, requiring cyclists to be especially careful to watch for turning or crossing traffic. The terms sidepath and cycle track can be used interchangeably. However, in contemporary bicycle planning, cycle track is often used to describe a reserved right-of-way for bicycles witnin the street channel but buffered from motor vehicle travel lanes, sometimes by parked cars. bike lanes. Bike lanes provide a painted lane intended only for the use of cyclists within the roadway. Bicyclists riding in bike lanes are subject to all regulations for vehicles. As of 2011, Topeka does not have bike lanes. However, it has begun to stripe parking lanes in certain streets that can function as bike lanes for users uncomfortable with operating in a regular travel lane.
paved shoulders. Paved shoulders are most often found on highways and roads without curbs. While intended to provide a safety measure for motor vehicles, they are a refuge for cyclists, especially on busy, high-speed roads. Many principal highways in Kansas have paved shoulders. Continuous streets These streets have relatively low volumes (usually below 3,000 vehicle per day) and good continuity, connecting with other similar streets in neighborhoods. These characteristics allow users to assemble long routes by following these continuous streets, which form the building blocks of a future onstreet bicycle system. Many cyclists find these streets to be relatively comfortable cycling environments, but they still require caution and safe cycling technique. Cautionary streets These streets are used by many cyclists, but their higher traffic volumes (usually between 3,000 and 7,500 vehicle per day) require more experience and comfort riding in mixed traffic than the Continuous Streets category. survivable arterials These are major streets that sometimes must be used to fill gaps and get cyclists to their destinations. Their medium to high traffic volumes (usually above 7,500 vehicles per day) and sometimes high speeds requires a high level of experience, and require special care and skill of cyclists. Riders who are not comfortable with these streets but who must use them should consider walking or riding carefully along sidewalks for short distances. other streets Some major arterials are indicated for reference purposes only. Cyclists are prohibited by law from using Interstate Highways or freeways. The map also indicates the web of local streets that serve neighborhoods. These streets usually have very low volumes, but do not provide the connections needed to make longer trips.
28
existing bicycle Conditions

Continuous Routes Cautionary Streets Survivable Arterials Hazardous Arterials Pathways / Trails Trails Under Development Side Paths Public Focal Points Parks
Figure 1.8
29
30
CHAPTER
the market For biCyClinG in topeka
31
his chapter investigates the market for bicycling in topeka the number of potential cyclists and the preferences of that potential market. it draws heavily on new and recent census information, national trends, and the 1,051 citizens who took the time to respond to the topeka bikeways survey
Before building a major shopping center or apartment project, a developer often commissions a market analysis, designed to determine whether enough people will shop or live there to support the effort and to define the features that will appeal to customers. Similarly, a bikeways master plan should also evaluate the size and character of the potential bicycling market. This helps assess the impact of a bicycle transportation program on factors such as motor vehicle traffic and emissions. It also helps us understand what the existing and potential bicycling community wants of the program, in turn increasing the chances that bicycling can reach its potential in Topeka. This market study uses two major instruments: estimates of existing and future pedestrian/bicycling demand, using a demand model developed by Alta Planning & Design. This model is clear, straightforward, and easy to track for future measurement. the results of the topeka bikeways survey, This survey was completed by 1,051 people, a very high participation rate, and provides valuable information about the citys potential bicycling community.
(including recreational activity). Bicycling has a 0.42% commuter mode share that is, 0.42% of all commuters travel by bicycle, approximately the same as the national share of about 0.5%. This contrasts with Minneapolis with a bicycling mode share of about 3.9%, one of the highest in the nation. However, Topekas share is respectable for a city with limited commuting infrastructure.
alternative possible demand

Figures 2.2 and 2.3 present an alternative reality for the present day, assuming that enough infrastructure has been put in place to have a significant impact on transportation choice. This alternative model paints a picture of what Topekas split could be in 2011. It assumes that: Walk-to-work commuters increase from about 2.13% to 4% of all workers. Transits share of the modal mix increases from a very low 1.34% to a still modest 3%. Bicycle commuting, encouraged by new infrastructure, could increase to about 2.5% among the more bicycle-friendly cities in the nation but well below top performers like Portland and Minneapolis. K-8 students are twice as likely to walk to school as they do today, to about 20%. This is still far lower than the 60% of students who walked to school thirty years ago.
existing pedestrian and bicycle demand

Figures 2.1 and 2.2 use the Alta model to estimate existing pedestrian and bicycle demand. Primary sources of information include the 2005-2009 average computations of the American Community Survey (ACS), developed by the Bureau of the Census, and 2010 Census data released to date. The model makes certain assumptions about mode split of populations such as school and college students. The sources of these assumptions are included in the table. Topeka now has an estimated 73,600 daily pedestrian trips and just under 9,600 bicycle trips for all purposes
Applying these changes increases daily pedestrian trips from about 73,600 to about 102,000, a gain of about 39%. Bicycle trips increase from about 9,500 to about 25,000, about a 160% increase. These very attainable changes begin to have a real impact on the overall transportation picture in Topeka. This model assumes that 9.5% of commuting trips are mode by active transportation
32
2 | THE MARKET FOR BICYCLING IN TOPEK A
Figure 2.1: existing pedestrian trips, topeka

2010 data or estimates
Study Area Population Employed Population Ped mode share Ped commuters Work at home Work at home ped trips Transit mode share Transit commuter trips Transit ped trips School, K-8 School, K-8 ped mode share School, K-8 ped trips School, 9-12 School 9-12 ped mode share School, 9-12 ped trips College College ped mode share College ped trips Total ped commuters Total ped commuter trips Other trips ratio Other ped trips(non-commuter)
sources/assumptions
127473 2010 Census 61946 Based on % in ACS, 2005-09 2.133% ACS, 2005-09 1322 2.504% ACS, 2005-09 388 Assumes 25% make at least one ped trip 1.334% ACS, 2005-09 830 620 75% walk to bus 15031 ACS, 2005-09 11.00% National Safe Routes to Schools Surveys, 2003 1653 6542 ACS, 2005-09 5.50% 50% of K-8 rate 360 9210 ACS, 2005-09 60% National Bicycling and Walking Study, FHWA, 1995 5526 9868 19737 Two X number of individual commuters 2.73 National Household Transportation Surveys, 2001 53882
total daily pedestrian trips
73619
33
Figure 2.2: existing daily bicycling trips, topeka 2010 data or estimates
Study Area Population Employed Population Bike mode share Bike commuters Work at home Work at home bike trips Transit mode share Transit commuter trips Transit bike trips School, K-8 School, K-8 bike mode share School, K-8 bike trips School, 9-12 School 9-12 bike mode share School, 9-12 bike trips College College bike mode share College bike trips Total bike commuters Total bike commuter trips Other trips ratio Other bike trips(non-commuter)
sources/assumptions
127473 2010 Census 61946 Based on % in ACS, 2005-09 0.415% ACS, 2005-09 257 2.504% ACS, 2005-09 155 Assumes 10% make at least one bike trip 1.334% ACS, 2005-09 830 41 5% bike to bus 15031 ACS, 2005-09 2.00% National Safe Routes to Schools Surveys, 2003 301 6542 ACS, 2005-09 1.00% 50% of K-8 rate 65 9210 ACS, 2005-09 5% National Bicycling and Walking Study, FHWA, 1995 461 1280 2560 Two X number of individual commuters 2.73 National Household Transportation Surveys, 2001 6989
total daily bike trips
9549
34
modes bus, foot, and bicycle in line with the 10% goal established by a number of cities.
Figure 2.3: alternative present pedestrian trip model for topeka 2010 data or estimates
Study Area Population Employed Population Ped mode share Ped commuters Work at home Work at home ped trips Transit mode share Transit commuter trips Transit ped trips School, K-8 School, K-8 ped mode share School, K-8 ped trips School, 9-12 School 9-12 ped mode share School, 9-12 ped trips College College ped mode share College ped trips Total ped commuters Total ped commuter trips Other trips ratio Other ped trips(non-commuter)
sources/assumptions
2030 potential demand

Figures 2.5 and 2.6 assume full implementation in Topeka of a pedestrian and bikeway system, along with supporting education and encouragement programs. This projection assumes that Topeka will grow at an average annual rate of 1/2% during the next 20 years. It projects that active modes will claim a 14% mode share within 20 years and that 4% of Topekans will cycle to work about the same level of Minneapolis in 2011. The number of students walking to school will increase to 25%, still far below levels experienced twenty years ago. These assumptions result in an increase of weekday pedestrian trips from 73,600 today to about 128,000; and an increase in weekday bicycle trips from about 9,600 to about 40,000. Achieving this level and assuming that 60% of these trips are currently being made by car saves 51,000 auto trips per weekday and about 13,260,000 trips per year. If each trip averages 3 miles, Topekans drive 38.8 million fewer miles per year, saving 1,600,000 gallons of gasoline assuming an average of 25 mpg. Given uncertainties during the next 20 years, these projections could well prove conservative.
127473 2010 Census 61946 Based on % in ACS, 2005-09 4.000% Based on infrastructure and educational programs 2478 2.504% ACS, 2005-09 620 Assumes 40% make at least one ped trip 3.000% Similar to mid-level transit cities 1858 1394 75% walk to bus 15031 ACS, 2005-09 22.00% 2 times existing percentage 3307 6542 ACS, 2005-09 5.50% No increase from earlier assumption 360 9210 ACS, 2005-09 60% National Bicycling and Walking Study, FHWA, 1995 5526 13685 27370 Two X number of individual commuters 2.73 National Household Transportation Surveys, 2001 74719
102088
35
Figure 2.4: alternative present bicycling trip model for topeka 2010 data or estimates
sources/assumptions
127473 2010 Census 61946 Based on % in ACS, 2005-09 2.500% Increase with new infrastructure from 0.42% 1549 2.504% ACS, 2005-09 310 Assumes 20% make at least one bike trip 3.000% ACS, 2005-09 830 93 5% bike to bus 15031 ACS, 2005-09 3.00% Increase from 2% 451 6542 ACS, 2005-09 3.00% 196 9210 ACS, 2005-09 8% Increase from 5% 737 3336 6672 Two X number of individual commuters 2.73 National Household Transportation Surveys, 2001 18213
24885
36
Figure 2.5: 2030 proposed pedestrian trip model for topeka 2030 estimates sources/assumptions
Study Area Population Employed Population Ped mode share Ped commuters Work at home Work at home ped trips Transit mode share Transit commuter trips Transit ped trips School, K-8 School, K-8 ped mode share School, K-8 ped trips School, 9-12 School 9-12 ped mode share School, 9-12 ped trips College College ped mode share College ped trips Total ped commuters Total ped commuter trips Other trips ratio Other ped trips(non-commuter) 138310 2010 Census 67212 Based on % in ACS, 2005-09 5.000% Based on infrastructure and educational programs 3361 2.504% ACS, 2005-09 841 Assumes 40% make at least one ped trip 5.000% Similar to mid-level transit cities 3360 2520 75% walk to bus 16309 ACS, 2005-09 25.00% 2 times existing percentage 4077 7098 ACS, 2005-09 5.50% No increase from earlier assumption 390 9993 ACS, 2005-09 60% National Bicycling and Walking Study, FHWA, 1995 5996 17186 34372 Two X number of individual commuters 2.73 National Household Transportation Surveys, 2001 93836
128208
37
figure 2.6: 2030 proposed bicycling trip model for topeka 2010 data or estimates
sources/assumptions
138310 2010 Census 67212 Based on % in ACS, 2005-09 4.000% Increase with new infrastructure from 0.42% 2688 2.504% ACS, 2005-09 337 Assumes 20% make at least one bike trip 5.000% ACS, 2005-09 3360 168 5% bike to bus 16309 ACS, 2005-09 5.00% Increase from 2% 815 7098 ACS, 2005-09 5.00% 355 9993 ACS, 2005-09 10% Increase from 5% 999 5363 10725 Two X number of individual commuters 2.73 National Household Transportation Surveys, 2001 29281
40006
38
the topeka bikeway survey

The previous discussion helps quantify the size of a potential bicycle system market, indicating that with realistic mode selection, Topeka could reach 40,000 daytime cyclists. The Bikeway Survey helps define the preferences and opinions of these prospective cyclists, and provides important guidance for designing the bikeways network.
2.20%
4.60%
3.00%
North Northeast North Central Downtown South Central East Southeast Southwest Peripheral
2.20%
North
14.70% 3.10% 1.50% 9.60% 30.80%
Who are topekas cyclists?

While the Bikeway Survey was not a scientific survey, the number and diversity of responses suggested that it represented a fairly representative sample of citizens with at least some interest in urban bicycling. The first questions explored the characteristics of these responses, and found that: a majority (56%) of respondents (and probably a majority of the potential bicycling market) lives in the north central and southwest parts of the city. A smaller but still significant group live in the south central and southeast parts, but citizens of the east and north parts of Topeka appeared less inclined to respond. Figure 2.7 displays the geographic sectors, while Figure 2.8 illustrates the distribution of responses. on the other hand, a majority (62%) are headed for destinations in Downtown and the North Central parts of the city, between the Butcher Creek/railroad corridor and I-470 and north of 21st Street. The next largest destination sector was the southwest portion. This suggests significant travel to commuting destinations, Washburn, and the Shunga Creek greenway. (Figure 2.9) responses were about evenly split between frequent and infrequent cyclists. In fact, a small
figure 2.7: survey sectors
30.50%
6.70% 1.80%
4.60%
3.00%
10.20%
24.70%
31.50%
Northeast 14.70% North Central 3.10% 1.50% Downtown South Central 9.60% East Southeast Southwest 30.50% Peripheral
30.80%
8.90% 13.50% 1.30% 1.30%
figure 2.8: place of residence or point of origin for respondents. A majority live or begin their most common trips in the north central and southwest parts of the city.
figure 2.9: Location of Most Frequent Destinations. The majority of respondents are cycling to destinations in Downtown and the north central sectors.
39
11.00% 22.70% 16% Never Few Times/Year Every Few Months 1-2 Times/Month 24.20% 16.10% 10% 1-2 Times/Week 3+ Times/Week
figure 2.10: frequency of bicycling. A surprising number of survey respondents (53%) are infrequent cyclists or nonriders. This suggests a possibility for significant growth.
majority (53%) of participants reported riding once or twice a month or less; 37% either did not ride or rode very infrequently. This is a very hopeful sign that reinforces market projections: many non-riders or occasional cyclists appear interested in the subject and in increasing their activity in bicycling. (Figure 2.10) exercise and recreation-related purposes are by far the most frequent reasons mentioned for bicycling. The next three largest trip purposes (trips to parks or recreation facilities, family outings, and touring) also involve recreational purposes. A smaller but significant group use bicycles for transportation to work, social visits, errands, and community destinations. But recreational cycling currently dominates the market. the largest group of respondents are cyclists most interested in improved infrastructure. The largest single group characterized themselves as interested in cycling and capable of using lowvolume streets, but concerned about riding in mixed traffic. The next largest group were committed urban cyclists comfortable in streets, but recognizing and supporting new facilities to expand ridership and improve safety. Very small groups were at the edges of the interest spectrum comfortable in every situation and seeing no reason for infrastructure development (0.7%) or not likely to ride under any circumstances (4.1%)
90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00%
figure 2.11: purposes of cycling trips. Most participants report that regular exercise is the most frequent reason for bicycling, followed by trips to parks or recreational destinations. Significant minorities report use bicycles for transportation purposes.
destinations
A bicycle transportation network should get people where they want to go. The survey listed 32 different community destinations or destination types, and asked respondents to rank them based on the importance of good bicycle access to them. Figure 2.13 describes the results, indicating the percentage of participants who considered good
40
access important or very important. These in turn suggest the places that the network should serve. Top priority destinations include the Shunga Greenway, principal park and recreational facilities (such as Gage Park, Lake Shawnee, and community centers), schools including Washburn, the Public Library, and Downtown. Shopping destinations and visitor attractions generally rank lower, as do suburban office parks and industrial employment centers.
4.10% 11.40%
0.70% 26.20%
Committed and Fearless Committed Urban Cyclist Interested & Concerned Recreational Trail User Interested Non-Rider Non-Rider Unlikely to Ride
11.80%
infrastructure types
Much of the survey was designed to assess the comfort of current and prospective bicyclists with different types of bicycle environments. The survey asked participants to respond to a gallery of photographs of streets and facilities. Most of the images for evaluating streets were in Topeka, while infrastructure solutions typically came from other cities. Through their responses, participants determined: Whether the setting is comfortable for most or all cyclists. Whether the setting is comfortable for the respondent, but not necessarily for less capable cyclists.
45.70%
figure 2.12: self-characterization of riders. Different riders have different needs, depending on their experiences, purposes, and comfort with riding in mixed traffic. The groups that participants chose to describe themselves indicates a substantial interest in new on- and off-street infrastructure.
committed and fearless: I am a committed bicyclist who rides in mixed traffic on every street. I dont believe that any significant further action on bicycle facilities is necessary. committed urban cyclist: I am a committed bicyclist who rides in mixed traffic on most streets, but believes that new facilities like bike lanes, bike routes, and trails are needed to improve Topekas biking environment for me and encourage other people to ride more often. interested and concerned: I am interested in bicycling and use low-traffic streets, but am concerned about the safety of riding in mixed automobile traffic. More trails and bike lanes and routes would increase the amount of trips that I make by bicycle. recreational trail user: I am a recreational or occasional bicyclist and ride primarily on trails like the Shunga and Landon. I would like to see more trails, but am unlikely to ride on city streets even with bike lanes interested non-rider: I do not ride a bicycle now, but might be interested if Topeka developed facilities that met my needs better or made me feel safer. non-rider unlikely to ride: I do not ride a bicycle, and am unlikely ever to do so.
The displays on pages 41 and 42 group survey images on the basis of their combined favorability ratings and show the following results: The top-rated (over 90% favorable) settings include either completely separated paths, both along roads and on exclusive right-of-way), or bike lanes either in calm traffic situations or with some type of physical separation from travel lanes. New York Citys buffered cycle track was the third highest-rated image in the survey.
41
destination
% reporting important or very important

87.9 86.5 83.0 81.3 80.6 75.3 74.8 74.2 71.6 71.0 70.2 68.8 66.5 61.3
Hummer Sports Park Kansas History Center Garfield Park Westridge Mall/Wanamaker North Topeka Main Street Fleming Place 10th Avenue Sports Center St. Francis Health Center VA Hospital General Shopping Areas Great Overland Station Sunflower Soccer Complex Security Benefit River Hill Offices Holiday Square Resers/Payless Area Brown v Board of Ed Golf Courses
60.5 50.8 49.3 48.4 46.9 45.9 44.7 43.0 40.5 38.7 37.1 34.4 32.0 29.4 28.7 25.1 24.1 16.8
The next highest-rated group (80-90% favorable) included quiet residential streets without special infrastructure, a colored bike lane otherwise unseparated from the travel lane, and the separated path along the Topeka Boulevard bridge over the Kansas River. The third highest rated group largely included a shared streets with unbuffered bike lanes or sharrows (shared lane markings) depending on street quality; a sidepath along an arterial street; and moderate volume through collector street without infrastructure. The lowest rated settings were streets with higher traffic volumes lacking trails, paths, or pavement markings. The lowest rated segment in the survey was Wanamaker Road.
Shunga Creek Trails & Parks Washburn University Lake Shawnee Topeka Public Library Neighborhood Parks Gage Park Kansas Avenue/Downtown Community Centers Middle Schools High Schools Washburn Tech State Capitol Area Cedarcrest Elementary Schools
figure 2.13: ratings of destinations for bicycle access. Major park and recreational facilities, neighborhood parks, Washburn, other schools, the library, and downtown are all considered important destinations by over 70%. In general, shopping destinations, suburban employment centers, and some types of recreational facilities ranked lower, as did areas that might be outside the normal range of respondents, such as North Topeka features.
Another point of interest involves looking at settings in which a substantially larger number of people rated an environment as comfortable for me rather than comfortable for most people. These suggest situations that experienced riders find satisfactory for themselves, but not suitable for less capable cyclists. These settings included wide downtown streets like Kansas Avenue and 6th Avenue; wide two-lane streets without bike lanes like East 6th Avenue; 2- and 3-lane arterials; and low-volume bridges represented by the Wittenberg Road bridge. One infrastructure solution the sharrow or shared lane marking also displayed this disparity, indicating a comfort level for more experienced bicyclists that did not carry over to less experienced riders. Finally, the survey results indicated that infrastructure and pavement markings make a difference, even in heavily trafficked settings. Wanamaker Road, a five-lane arterial facility received the lowest favorable rating in the survey (10.6%). However, a similar five-lane facility with bike lanes received a 66.2% favorable response. Bike lanes had an
42
over 90% favorable (comfortable for most riders + comfortable for me)
80-90% favorable (comfortable for most riders + comfortable for me)
43
equally marked benefit along narrower streets. Sharrows also displays a significantly higher favorable rating (although not as large a difference as for bike lanes) over comparable streets. bike racks on buses Topekas bus fleet is almost fully equipped with bike racks, and racks have been successful in many locations for encouraging dual mode trips. The bicycle is used as the local distributor, connecting the riders home or destination with the bus route, or assisting the rider by reducing the length or difficulty of the bicycle trip. However, in the survey, about 90% of respondents reported never using the racks; only about 1.1% reported using them once a week or more. This may result from Topekas relatively compact nature and the central location of principal destinations, making the majority of trips relatively short. Nevertheless, dual mode trips can be an excellent solution for many, including residents of outlying areas or people who want to cycle in only one direction. importance of various actions Responses to a list of possible actions to improve Topekas bicycle environment indicated a strong priority for infrastructure programs. Initiatives ranked highest included bike lanes, trails, roadside paths, and improved private project design for better pedestrian
Under 40% favorable (comfortable for most riders + comfortable for me)
44
10.6%
73.6%
51.3%
66.2%
five-lane arterials with and without bike lanes, with relative favorability responses indicated
92.0%
two-lane residential collectors with and without bike lanes.
66.8%
Wide two-lane mixed use streets with and without sharrows.
45
figure 2.14: importance of various actions

action % reporting important or very important
92.3 92.2 86.2 86.0 77.9 72.5 71.9 68.8 65.7 64.2 62.7 59.9 59.4 56.8 56.5 55.1 51.2 47.5 43.3 41.4
Bike Lanes More trails Widened sidepaths along streets Better project design for bike/ped accessibility Destination-based bicycle network Strong bike advocacy organization Bike safety programs for kids More bike parking Commuter Challenge event Showers at workplaces Wayfinding signage Improved bike education Special events Motorist education about bikes More information about clubs/programs Protective laws Share the Road signs Sharrows Bike share program Bike Station
and bicycle accessibility. Supporting efforts, including a comprehensive designated bicycle network, advocacy, special events, and safety education were also considered important or very important by over 60% of respondents. Figure 2.14 presents the percentage of survey responses calling an action important or very important for increasing bicycling in the city.
conclusions
This consideration of market potentials and preferences tells us that: There is a substantial potential market for urban bicycling in Topeka. The distribution of destinations and compact, bikeable nature of the city makes bicycling a viable form of transportation for many Topekans. Reasonable and attainable assumptions, based on meeting infrastructure and supporting needs, suggest that the number of weekday trips made by bicycle can increase from the current level of about 10,000 trips to about 40,000 trips within twenty years. The nature of people responding to the Bikeways Survey helps substantiate the conclusion of substantial growth potential for bicycle transportation. About half the respondents are at best infrequent bicyclists, but their participation and responses indicated a substantial interest in increasing their own level of activity. Participants placed a high priority on infrastructure improvements, while not excluding supporting initiatives. Generally, participants preferred settings that provided at least some degree of separation of bicyclists and motor vehicles, such as trails, sidepaths,
46
bicycle tracks, and buffered bike lanes. However, quiet streets with good continuity a significant asset of the citys street system also were seen as very safe environments. Respondents also tended to rate multi-lane streets as less safe than two-lane corridors. Streets that included some form of infrastructure., such as bike lanes and sharrows, were seen as substantially safer than comparable streets lacking these features. On-street riding and some low-cost adaptive solutions, such as the use of shared lane markings, improved conditions for more experienced cyclists, but were seen as less suitable to inexperienced riders, children, and families.
47
48
3 | THE BIKEWAY NET WORK: PRINCIPLES AND STRUC TURE
CHAPTER
the bikeway network: PRINCIPLES AND STRuCTuRE
49
THE TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN
his chapter presents the principles and design parameters that govern the design of topekas bikeway network. these principles, derived from the analysis of existing conditions, the community involvement process, and market preferences help to generate the overall system concept proposed here.
The introductory section identified six guiding requirements for an effective bicycle network, adapted from work completed by the Netherlands Centre for Research and Contract Standardization in Civil and Traffic Engineering: integrity: The ability of a system to link starting points continuously to destinations, and to be easily and clearly understand by users. directness: The capacity to provide direct routes with minimum misdirection or unnecessary distance. safety: The ability to minimize hazards and improve safety for users of all transportation modes. comfort: Consistency with the capacities of users and avoidance of mental or physical stress. experience: The quality of offering users a pleasant and positive experience. feasibility: The ability to maximize benefits and minimize costs, including financial cost, inconvenience, and potential opposition. These six requirements express the general attributes of a good system, but must have specific criteria and even measurements that both guide the systems design and evaluate how well it works. Figures 3.1 through 3.6 present criteria for each of the six more abstract requirements, and design guides and methods to manage ultimate performance.
destination-based. The Topeka network is generated by destinations that the community and the potential market identifies as important. While the bicycle suitability of streets is an important consideration, the proposed network is more than a grid of bicycle-friendly streets. Rather, it is a transportation system that takes people to specific places. transit model. Several reasonable models for network planning exist, with choices dependent on the nature of the city. For the Topeka system, we use a transit model, identifying destination-based routes almost as if they were transit lines. This type of system helps bicyclists travel to destinations with minimum consultation of support materials , once they select their initial routes. This system also emphasizes the interconnection of routes. Thus, a typical cyclist heading to a specific destination with travel from a point of origin and know the combination of designated routes that will lead to the destination. incremental integrity. As discussed in Table 3.6 (Feasibility), incremental integrity the ability of the network to provide a system of value at each step of completion is an important attribute. The first step in completion should be valuable and increase bicycle access even if nothing else is done. However, its coherence expands bicycle use, demonstrates the potential that bicycle transportation has as a cost-effective mode, and builds support for continued development. Each subsequent phase of completion follows the same principle of leaving something of clear value and integrity, even if it were the ultimate stage of completion. evolution. As part of the concept of incremental integrity, the system is designed to evolve and improve over time. For example, a relatively low-cost project or design element can establish a pattern of use that supports something better in the future. To use a cliche, the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. Rather than trying to accumulate funds to develop an optimum facility, we
attributes of the network

Based on this development of the six requirements presented in the tables, the Topeka system design follows the following major attributes:
50
should establish an initial network that is both functional for many potential users and provides a foundation for the future. conflict avoidance. Few important actions are completely without controversy, but successful development
of a bicycle transportation system in Topeka should avoid unnecessary discord and impact on neighborhoods. For example, many communities have experienced difficulty with removing parking to provide space for bike lanes. While this might be the best long-term solution, it can generate opposition that jeopardizes the overall project. On
Figure 3.1: development of the integrity requirement.

performance factor Comprehensiveness measures Number of connected destinations on system performance standard Major destination types identified by survey and presented in destinations analysis should all be accessible by the network. 100% of top destination types, 80% of all destinations should be served. New destinations as developed should be developed along the network or served by extensions. Continuity Number of discontinuities along individual routes Users headed on a route to a destination must not be dropped at a terminus without route or directional information. Even at incremental levels, route endings must make functional sense. Transitions between facility types must be clear to users and well-defined. Transitions from one type of infrastructure to another along the same route should avoid leading cyclists of different capabilities into uncomfortable settings or beyond their capacities. Infrastructure should be recognizable and its features (pavement markings, design conventions) consistent throughout the system Wayfinding/directional information Completeness and clarity of signage Economy and efficiency of graphics Complaints from users Route choice Number of alternative routes of approximately equal distance Signs must keep users informed and oriented at all points Sign system should avoid ambiguities that cause users to feel lost or require them to carry unnecessary support materials. Signs should be clear, simple, consistent, and readable, and should be consistent with the MUTCD. Use of the Clearview font is recommended. Ultimate system provides most users with a minimum of two alternatives of approximately equal distance. Minimum distance between alternative routes should be about 500 feet
Consistency
Percentage of typical reported Typically, a minimum of 50-70% of most trips to identified destinations should be trips accommodated by the accommodated by the bikeways network. ultimate network.
51
local streets, shared routes and signs that do not disturb business in the neighborhood can provide an adequate facility that focuses on the positive and minimizes divisive conflicts. More extensive future solutions should always be done with the full participation of surrounding neighborhoods, and the mutual benefits of street adaptations should be emphasized. For example, bikeway design can slow motorists and keep unwanted through traffic out of neighborhoods, benefitting both cyclists and neighbors.
use of existing facilities. Great existing features like the Shunga and Landon Trails are integral to the bikeway system and should not be taken for granted. Indeed, investments that can make these facilities safer, such as improving visibility at bends on the Shunga Drive, extending sign programs to the trails, and increasing width in very heavily used areas, can be very important parts to enhancing the quality and experience of the larger system.
Figure 3.2: development of the directness requirement.

performance factor Access measures Coverage Access to all parts of the city Bicycling speed Design and average speed of system performance standard The network should provide convenient access to all parts of the city. As a standard, all urban residential areas should be within one-half mile from one of the systems routes, and should be connected to those routes by a relatively direct local street connection. The network should permit relatively consistent operation at a steady speed without excessive delays. System should be able to deliver an average point to point speed between 12 and 15 mph for users. Through portion of routes should permit operation in a 15 to 20 mph range. Diversions and misdirections Maximum range of detours or diversions from a straight line between destinations. Detour ratio: Ratio of actual versus direct distance between two points. Routes should connect points with a minimum amount of misdirections. Users should perceive that the route is always taking them in the desired direction, without making them reverse themselves or go out of their way to an unreasonable degree. Maximum diversion of a straight line connecting two key points on a route should not exceed 0.25 miles on either side of the line. Detour ratio (distance between two points/shortest possible distance) should not exceed 1.2 over long distances and 1.4 over short distances. Delays Amount of time spent not moving per mile Routes should minimize unnecessary or frustrating delays, including excessive numbers of stop signs, and delays at uncontrolled intersections waiting for gaps in cross traffic. Routes should maximize use of existing signalized crossings. Target design should limit maximum delays to about 30 seconds per mile over long distances and 45 seconds per mile over short distances. Intersections Bicycle direction through intersections Bicyclists should be able to continue through intersections as vehicles. Situations that force cyclists to become pedestrians in order to negotiate intersections should be avoided.
52
figure 3.3: development of the safety requirement.

performance factor Reduced number and fear of crash incidents measures Number of incidents Reactions/perceptions of users performance standard The network should reduce the rate of crashes over ten year periods. Data collection should be sufficient to trace baseline data and measure the impact of improvements. Bikeways system users should feel that the system protects their physical safety, as measured by both use of routes and survey instruments. System design should avoid encounters between bicyclists and incompatible motor traffic streams (high volumes and/or high speeds). Separation and protection of vulnerable users should increase as incompatibilities increase. Infrastructure should be designed for utility by at least 80% of the potential market. Topeka bikeways survey indicates that 75% of respondents are comfortable in at least some form of mixed traffic. Infrastructure applications should be matched with appropriate contexts. Warning signage directed to motorists should be sufficient to alert them to the presence of cyclists along the travel route. Surfaces and markings should be clearly visible to all users. Obstructions, such as landscaping, road geometry, and vertical elements, should not block routine visibility of cyclists and motorists. Trail and pathway geometries should avoid sharp turns and alignments that hide cyclists operating in opposing directions. Where these conditions are unavoidable, devices such as mirrors and advisory signs should be used to reduce hazards. Door hazards and parking conflicts Number of incidents Parking configurations Location of bicycle tracking guides Intersection conflicts Location and types of pavement markings Number of intersections or crossings per mile Complaints Number of complaints per facility type Component design should track bicycles outside of the door hazard zone. Back-out hazards of head-in parking should be avoided or mitigated when diagonal parking is used along streets. Intersections should provide a clearly defined and visible track through them for cyclists Cycle tracks (sidepaths) should generally be used on continuous segments with a minimum number of interruptions. Complaints should be recorded by type of infrastructure and location of facility, to set priorities for remedial action. 53
Appropriate routing: mixing Average daily traffic (ADT) versus separation of traffic criteria for mixed traffic Traffic speed criteria for mixed traffic Infrastructure, visibility, signage Pairing of context and infrastructure solutions Mutual visibility and awareness of bicycle and motor vehicles
fill gaps. In some cases, the most important parts of a network involve small projects that make connections rather than long distance components. Often, these short links knit longer street or trail segments together into longer routes or provide access to important destinations. These gaps may include a short trail segment that connects two continuous streets together, or an intersection improvement that bridges a barrier The development of the overall network is strategic, using manageable initiatives to create a comprehensive system. routes of least resistance. The Topeka Bikeways Survey showed that the citys potential urban cycling market is more comfortable in situations with some degree of sepa-
ration or on quiet streets. It is not necessary to try to force bicycle access onto every major street when more comfortable, lower cost options exist on the Topeka grid. In Chapter Four, we present the concept of bicycle boulevards local streets that parallel major arterials and can serve cyclists needs in ways that satisfy the comfort requirement successfully. However, complete streets are also part of a comprehensive network, where several critical links in the Topeka system involve incorporating bicycle and pedestrian accommodation into new major street projects. Several key routes in the network depend on building these multimodal facilities, consistent with the citys recently adopted complete streets policy.
Figure 3.4: development of the comfort requirement.

performance factor Road surface measures Quality and type of road surface Materials Incidence of longitudinal cracking and expansion joints Hills Number and length of hills and inclines Maximum grades on component for both long and short distances Traffic stress Average daily traffic (ADT) Average traffic speed Volume of truck traffic Stops that interrupt rhythm Number of stop signs/ and continuity segment performance standard The networks components should provide a reasonably smooth surface with a minimum of potholes and areas of paving deterioration. Roads should be free of hazardous conditions such as settlement and longitudinal cracks and pavement separation. All routes in the urban system should be hard-surfaced, unless specifically designated for limited use. As a general rule, routes should avoid more than one incline over 5% for each mile of travel. Maximum average design grades should not exceed 7% over a hill not to exceed 400 feet in length; or 5% over the course of a mile. Off-road climbing facilities should be provided where slow-moving bike traffic can obstruct motor vehicles and increase motorist conflict. Generally, the network should choose paths of lower resistance/incompatibility wherever possible and when DIRECTNESS standards can be reasonably complied with. The network should avoid mixed traffic situations over 5,000 vpd when alternatives exist. Alternatives can include bike lanes, separations, or alternative right-of-way. Network routes should avoid or redirect frequent stop sign controls. The number of stops between endpoints should not exceed three (1 per quarter mile average) per mile segment.
54
Figure 3.5: development of the eXperience requirement.

performance factor Surrounding land use measures Neighborhood setting Adjacent residential or open space use, including institutional campuses Adjacent street-oriented commercial Landscape Location and extent of parks or maintained open space performance standard Surrounding land use should provide the network user with an attractive adjacent urban environment. As a design target, a minimum of 75% of the length of the route should pass through residential, open space, or street-oriented (main street) commercial environments. Routes should provide access to commercial and personal support services, such as food places, convenience stores, and restrooms. Network should maximize exposure of or use right-of-ways along or through public parks and open spaces. Environmental contexts to be maximized include parks, waterways and lakes, and landscaped settings. Social safety Residential development patterns Observability: Presence of windows or visible uses along the route Population density or number of users Furnishings and design On-trail landscaping, supporting furnishings The network should provide routes with a high degree of observability street oriented uses, residential frontages, buildings that provide vantage points that provide security to system users. Areas that seem insecure, including industrial precincts, areas with few street-oriented businesses, or areas with little use or visible maintenance should generally be avoided, except where necessary to make connections.
Network routes should include landscaping, street furnishings, lighting, rest stops, graphics, and other elements that promote the overall experience. These features are particularly important along trails. North Topeka Destinations. Features like North Topekas main street district along Kansas Avenue and iconic businesses like the grocery in Little Russia are special destinations that add both function and flavor to the experiences offered by the network.
55
Figure 3.6: development of the feasibility requirement.

performance factor Cost effectiveness measures Route cost Maximum use of low-cost components Population/destination density performance standard The network should generate maximum benefit at minimum cost. Where possible, selected routes should favor segments that can be adapted to bicycle use with economical features rather than requiring major capital investments. Initial routes should be located in areas with a high probability of use intensity: substantial population density and/or incidence of destinations. Initial investments should integrate existing assets, such as the Shunga Trail, extending their reach into other neighborhoods and increasing access to them. Major off-street investments should concentrate on closing gaps in an on-street system. Phasing and incremental integrity Self-contained value Ability to evolve The network should provide value and integrity at all stages of completion. A first stage should increase bicycle access and use in ways that make future phases logical. The network should be incremental, capable of building on an initial foundation in gradual phases. Phases should be affordable, fitting within a modest annual allocation by the city, and complemented by major capital investments incorporating other sources. Neighborhood relationships and friction Parking patterns Development and circulation patterns The network should avoid conflict situations, where a route is likely to encounter intense local opposition. Initial design should avoid impact on potentially controversial areas, such as parking, without neighborhood assent. Involuntary acquisition of right-of-way should be avoided wherever possible. Detailed planning processes to implement specific routes should include local area or stakeholder participation.
56
the topeka bikeway system

Figure 3.7 displays the proposed Bikeway Master Plan for Topeka, based on the requirements and principles described previously in this chapter. The proposed system includes: through routes. At completion, the network recommends 25 point-to-point through routes, using on-street infrastructure, short trail connections, and strategic sidepaths/cycle tracks to create an interconnected bicycle transportation grid. For clarity, these lines are identified by associated color and number, requiring an identification system that would be adapted to the city environment. The subsequent tables in this chapter summarize the individual through route. Chapter Five discusses each individual route in detail. connecting links. These connections are not part of the through route structure, but use strategic streets to serve other destinations or to connect major routes together. They are typically lower volume streets that would be marked to identify them as shared use connectors. multi-use trails. These long-distance trails, both existing and future, are fully integrated into the bicycle transportation network. The majority of the trail mileage is in place, but major additions include facilities along the Kansas River, connections between the Deer Creek and Lake Shawnee Trails via Dornwood Park, and the extension of the Soldier Creek Trail in North Topeka.
topeka bikeways system
Figure 3.7
57
Figure 3.8
central topeka bikeway system
58
through route
name east-west bikeway
endpoints
Deer Creek Trail at 6th (E) to 10th and Urish (W)
Major Destinations highlights served

Deer Creek Trail, Rice Park, Downtown, Capitol, Topeka High, St. Francis, Childrens Park, Gage Park, Washburn Tech, Wanamaker District, Sports Center Hummer Sports Park, Washburn Park, Randolph E.S., KNI/VA, Big Shunga Park, Shunga Trail, Brookwood Shopping, Jardine M.S. Shunga Trail, Felker Park, VA Hospital, Edgewater Park, McClure E.S., Christ the King School, Wanamaker corridor, Topeka Public Golf Course Hayden High, Gage Park, Hillsdale Park, McCarter ES, Topeka West HS, Fairlawn Plaza, McClure ES, Crestview Park and Community Center, Shunga Trail Major east-west route, using 6th, 8th, and 10th as principal routes, and features bike lanes on 6th and a complete street conversion on 10th. Major commuter route connects eastside trails, Downtown and the Capitol area, Gage Park, the Wanamaker corridor, and the northwest part of the city. Major north-south route, using shared lanes on Randolph Street, and including a path connection on the edge of the KNI campus to the Shunga Trail. Continues south along existing trail spur to 29th Street, with a crossing at that point. Continues south along the Shunga Creek south trib and Randolph to 37th Stret, and along the creek under I-470 to connect with other southwest routes. East-west on-street shared route on low volume local collector. Includes Gage Blvd. cycle track connection on VA campus, connecting to Shunga Trail, and the existing 25th Street overpass without ramps at I-470.
implementation term
Short-term from Deer Creek to Gage Park. 10th Street project to Fairlawn advances extension to Belle Avenue. Completion depends on schedule for rest of 10th St. Short-term from Hummer Sports Park to Big Shunga Park, using Randolph through KNI, with short link to Shunga Trail. Extension south includes crossing at 29th Street and link to 37th Street. Short-term, requiring little modification of infrastructure. Cycle track connection along west edge of VA campus and a Gage Blvd. crossing are short to medium term projects. Short-term, requiring little modification of infrastructure between 10th and Belle and Crestview Park.
randolph bikeway
West and Center Drive (Hummer Sports Park) to 37th-Randolph
25th street bikeway
Shunga Trail at Gage Blvd (E) to 25th-Urish (W)
belle bikeway
Hayden High (N) to Shunga Trail at Crestview Park (S)
North-south on-street shared route on low volume local collector. Extension beyond 10th and Belle involves 10th Avenue complete street improvement. Park road connections can be used through Gage Park before path construction is completed, with path around or through park completing ultimate concept.
59
through route
name oakland-potwin bikeway
endpoints
Shunga Trail at Rice Rd (E) to Kansas History Center/Murray Hill Station (W)

Shunga/Deer Creek Trails, Phillip Billard Airport, Lundgren ES, Oakland Billard Park and Community Center, Santa Fe Park, Downtown and Riverfront, Ward Meade Park, Meadows ES, Auburndale Park, Hummer Sports Park, Family Services Campus, McLenman State Park, Security Benefit Campus, Kansas History Center Landon Trail, Jay Scheidler ES, Lake Sherwood, Farley School, Cypress Ridge/Family Park, Wanamaker ES, 10th Street Sports Park, Kansas History Center Complex but rich east-west route that includes a variety of infrastructure types. Links to eastern terminus of Shunga Trail with cycle tracks along Phillip Billard Airport, with on-street tie to Oakland Park. Incorporated into riverfront development, including bicycle shoulders on River Drive and future route dependent on Polk/Quincy viaduct and I-70 interchange design. Possibility of trail crossing using abandoned railroad bridge to North Topeka and levee. On-street routes through historic Potwin neighborhood, continuing on paths through Hummer Sports Park and Family Services campus, and continuing west along 6th Avenue complete street project to Kansas History Center. Potential continuation to trailhead of a future trail along the south side of the Kansas River. Peripheral loop based on upgrades or shoulders on 49th and 53rd, complete street improvement of South Wanamaker, and future complete street widening of Urish Road. Uses shared routes on Lincolnshire and Nottingham
implementation term
Medium- to long-term, requiring major capital investments and resolution of Polk/Quincy viaduct design.
southwest belt bikeway
Landon Trail at Terra Drive to Kansas History Center (E) and Murray Hill Station (N)
Long-term to achieve full route integrity. Individual projects should be designed to complete street standards.
10th/15th street bikeway
Deer Creek Trail at 6th (E) to 15th-Belle (W).
Deer Creek Trail, Rice Park, Freedom Valley Park, Shunga Trail, Capitol and environs, Central Park and Community Center, Robinson MS, Washburn University area, Randolph ES, Gage Shopping Center, Hillsdale Shoppjng Center, McCarter ES
Largely on-street, east-west route with important trail connections. Includes path connections at Robinson Middle School campus and on edge of Mt. Hope Cemetery, along with major street crossing improvements.
Medium-term between 10th and Golden to Belle Avenue terminus. Portions of route would be developed in the shortterm.
60
through route
name 25th/Clay bikeway
endpoints
Dornwood Park (E) to Ward Meade Park (N)

Dornwood Park (Lake Shawnee with connecting trail), Highland Park HS, Landon Trail, National Guard, Topeka Country Club, Shunga Glen Park and Shunga Trail, Chesney Park, Central Park and Community Center, Holy Name ES, Topeka HS, Meadows ES, Old Prairie Town Potwin, St. Francis Hospital, Public Library, Robinson MS, Washburn University, Whitson ES L-shaped route linking central Topeka to Lake Shawnee. Initial on-street route, using shared lanes for most of its length. Bike lane opportunity on east end of 25th Street, with cycle tracks possible along other segments of 25th Street.
implementation term
Short-term for immediate on-street route; mediumterm for ultimate infrastructure along 25th Street.
washburn bikeway
1st and Greenwood, Potwin (N) to 17thSims (W)
L-shaped route with one-way bike lanes (potentially advisory) on Washburn and Lane, with cycle track distributor on periphery of Washburn campus. Continues on-street on 19th Street to terminus with Route 7.
Resurfacing of Lane/ Washburn should be coordinated with pavement markings. Internal campus roads and 19th link to Randolph route. Medium-term route extension west of Randolph. Short- to medium-term between 17th and 37th Street; Medium- to longterm for north and south components of the route.
10
wanamaker Corridor bikeway
6th and Wanamker to Washburn Rural HS and MS
Washburn Rural schools, Jay Scheidler MS, Wanamaker commercial and office corridor, Westridge Mall, Kansas DNR, River Hill office park
North-south route dependent on improvement of Wanamaker Road between 31st and 37th and sidepath development south of 37th. Splits into east and west on-street segments on either side of Wanamker, using Villa West/Brookfield to the west and Westport to the east, reconnecting via proposed bike lane on 17th. Also includes extension of Arrowhead north of 17th, and a new trail link between Huntoon and Robinson Drive. Includes bicycle-friendly adaptations of Wanamaker overpass north of 10th St.
61
through route
name lake to landon bikeway
endpoints
Neighborhood connection between Landon Trail and Lake Shawnee Trail at 41st Street

Lake Shawnee Park and Trail, St. Matthew ES, Betty Phillips Park, Landon Trail East-west route connecting Landon Trail and southeast neighborhoods to Lake Shawnee. Includes short access sidepaths along 29th and 37th to link local streets and Betty Phillips Park to Landon Trail. Ultimate design uses son-street shared legs on 242nd/41st, and a sidepath segment on Adams Street between 35th and 42nd. Existing pedestrian bridge helps connect Betty Phillips Park to Landon Trail.
implementation term
Short- to medium-term for low-volume portions, but medium-term for full route integrity. Could be advanced if Wittenberg Bridge improvement or Dornwood Trail link to Lake Shawnee Trail are indefinitely delayed. Medium-term assuming development of new Gage Blvd crossing.
11
12
edgewater bikeway
17th-Sims (N), interconnecting with Routes 7,9 to 37th and Twilight (S) interconnecting with Route 2.
Edgewater Park, Crestview Park and Community Center, Shunga Trail and spur to south neighborhoods, McEachron ES, Gage Blvd. commercial, Wood Valley area
Connecting route on low-volume streets, connecting Shunga Trail and Crestview Park to surrounding neighborhoods. Link to Randolph Street bikeway and crossing to Wood valley area using proposed trail segment along creek under I-470.
13
huntoon bikeway
12th and Monroe (E) to Wanamaker and Huntoon (W), interconnecting Routes 10 and 20
Brown v. Board, Williams Magnet School, Capitol environs, Westboro commercial village, Hillsdale Park, Washburn Technical, Wanamaker corridor
East-west commuter route, with road modifications to provide one-way bike lanes on 12th Street/Huntoon oneway pair. Continuation west to Wanamaker requires oneway cycle tracks or bike lanes.
Short-term between Capitol area and Gage Blvd. with coordination of street rehabilitation and pavement markings. Medium-term for westward extension using cycle tracks.
14
Golden bikeway
Riverside ATV Park (N) to Dornwood Park (S)
Riverside Park, Lundgren ES, OaklandBillard Park and Community Center, State St ES, Chase MS, Shunga Trail, Scott Magnet School, Dornwood Park (Lake Shawnee connection)
North-south route on east side of town, linking Oakland to Shunga Trail and Dornwood Park. Onstreet shared route on Chester to Seward, with offroad trail connection along Golden to the Shunga Trail. Continuation requires shoulders or cycle tracks along Golden, a cycle track along 21st to Highland and an onstreet route on Highland to connect with Route 8.
Short-term from Riverside to Shunga Trail. Mediumto long-term for full route completion.
62
through route
name 4th avenue bikeway
endpoints
Shunga Trail at Golden Ave(E) to Willow Park (W)

Shunga Trail, Scott Magnet School, Shunga Trail, Ripley Park, Amtrak, Downtown, Sumner School, Meadows ES, Willow Park East-west connecting route linking east side with central Topeka. Shared lanes or bike lanes on 4th Avenue with one-way bike lanes on 4th/5th one-way pair to Willow Park, connecting to Washburn Bikeway.
implementation term
Medium- term
15
16
Clarion bikeway
Clarion Park at 37th and Fairlawn to 33rd and Indian Hills
Clarion Park, YMCA, Lake Sherwood, Farley School
Short east-west route, largely using trails to connect Lake Sherwood area and other neighborhoods to YMCA and Clarion Park. Route uses trail on periphery of YMCA campus and through drainage corridor to Belle Avenue; continues west on-street along 35th Street and 34th Terrace, and continues along Shunga Creek on public land to Nottingham and Fountaindale to 33rd. Further extension of east endpoint south through Clarion Park to proposed Elevation Parkway. East-west route, linking south-central neighborhoods and Shunga Trail with the Landon and Lake Shawnee Trails. From Lake Shawnee, includes bike lanes on 37th Street to Indiana, and continues with shared routes to the Landon Trail at Betty Phillips Park. Uses trail to link to 33rd Street and Croix Street, continuing onstreet through neighborhoods via 33rd Street. Possible trailhead upgrade at 33rd Street on Landon Trail.
Medium- term, requiring significant trail development. Extension through Clarion Woods depends on Elevation Pkwy scheduling
17
33rd street bikeway
Lake Shawnee at 37th Street (E) to Stone/33rd and Twilight Drive, connecting with Route 12
Lake Shawnee, Eisenhower MS, Betty Phillips Park, Landon Trail, White Lakes Mall, Avondale West ES, Shaner ES, Jardine MS, Bishop ES
Medium-term, requiring crossing to Landon Trail at Betty Phillips Park and improved Croix Street crossing.
18
hillcrest bikeway 10th and Indiana (N)
Freedom Valley Park, to 35th and Indiana (S) Hillcrest Park and Community Center, Eisenhower MS, Ross ES
North-south connecting route uses Indiana and a trail through Hillcrest Park to 21st and Minnesota. Continues south along improved Indiana Avenue, and continues south to middle school along bicycle boulevard using Wisconsin/Minnesota Ave.
Medium to long-term
63
through route
name arrowhead bikeway
endpoints
L-configured route from Cedar Crest/ McLennan Park (N) to 37th to Randolph (S), with access to Wood Valley at Shunga Creek South Branch connection

Kansas DNR, River Hill office park, Landon MS, Washburn Tech, Wanamaker corridor, French MS, Skyline Park, Horne Park L-shaped trail, paralleling I-470 and serving adjacent neighborhoods. Predominately on-street route uses local streets between Huntoon and Cedar Crest and coincides with Wanamaker Bikeway north of 17th Street. Route continues on-street, utilizing Arrowhead Drive and 33rd Street, crossing Fairlawn, A short trail at the base of Skyline Parks hill connects to 33rd/34th, and 35th terrace, together paralleling the south side of I-470 and linking to the route terminus at 37th and Randolph. Loop route around Lake Sherwood, connecting to the system node at 37th and Randolph. Route east of Wanamaker depends on future construction of Elevation Parkway, which should be built as a complete street. Onstreet segments from Nottingham (Route 6) to 33rd and Indian Hills complete a loop around Lake Sherwood. Indian Hills and 29th Street segments propose complete street construction,with bike lanes.
implementation term
Medium-term, requiring several gaps for full route integrity
19
20
elevation parkway
37th and Randolph (E) to 29th and Wanamker (NW) connecting with Route 10
Skyline Park, Clarion Woods, Lake Sherwood, Indian Hills ES, Wanamker Corridor
Short-term for on-street route on south side of Lake Sherwood. Long-term for balance of route. 29th Street, a near-term project, should be developed as a complete street between Gisbourne and Wanamaker
College bikeway
21
Auburndale Park (N) Auburndale Park, to Shunga Trail at Plass Willow Park, St. Francis Street Hospital, Public Library, Washburn University, Shunga Trail
North-south central city route, using on-street routes including College Avenue, internal streets through Washburn Uinversity, and College Avenue to the trail. A short path segment included through Willow Park, linking College and Elmwood Avenues. Proposes a pathway link on south edge of campus between Jewell and College, and improved crossings of 17th and 21st.
Short-term
22
11th street bikeway
Shunga Trail at 15th Street (E) to Gage Park
Shunga Trail, Brown v. Board of Education, Williams Magnet, Capitol and environs, Topeka HS, Public Library, Washburn Park, Gage Park
East-west connecting route, connecting major community features. Almost completely on-street route, but requires some street modifications, including bicycle boulevard configuration on 11th Street. 11th Street should have reduced number of stop signs and possible improvement of ped bridge at Washburn Park.
Short-term for core of the route, providing library access. Pavement marking modifications have been completed as part of 10th St resurfacing in 2011.
64
through route
name north topeka bikeway
endpoints
Seaman HS (N) to 10th and Kansas (S)

Seaman HS, Rochester ES, YMCA, Great Overland Station, North Topeka Main Street, Downtown Topeka, Capitol and environs North-south through trail, incorporating Central Avenue bicycle boulevard, existing Soldier Creek Trail, and major improvement of Rochester/Tyler Street with shoulders/ bike lanes. Uses on-street shared route along Laurent to center of North Topeka business district, with paths connecting to Kansas/Quincy bridge under the span. Road diet on bridge can produce bike lanes. Bicycle access also should be designed into new plan for Kansas Avenue. Back-in diagonal parking should be utilized along Kansas where bike lanes are employed. East-west North Topeka route. Lyman and Lower Silver Lake can be signed as shared routes for experienced riders, but require shoulders for safe access. Blaine Avenue, Central Avenue, and Kansas Avenue segments are on-road shared routes to Great Overland. Continuity requires ped crossing at Central over Soldier Creek. Use of westbound/southbound movement over Gateway Bridge is legal but not encouraged.
implementation term
Long-term for entire route. Short-term adaptations for segment between Downtown and Tyler and Lyman, using Soldier Creek Trail.
23
24
lyman/lower silver lake bikeway
Great Overland Station Logan JHS, Lyman Brickyard and Lower ES, North Kansas Ave Silver Lake (W) business corridor, Soldier Creek Trail, Garfield Park, North Topeka Main Street, Great Overland Station
Medium-term for North Topeka segment between Great Overland Station and Logan Middle School; long-term for balance.
25
46th street/ hunters ridge bikeway
Seaman HS to Brickyard and Lower Silver Lake
Seaman HS, Hunters Ridge commercial
Eventual north loop along developing 46th Street corridor, anticipates bicycle shoulders or cycle track along 46th Street. More feasible route to Hunters Ridge uses rural section roads from Rochester Road. Brickyard Road connection to Lower Silver Lake may be signed immediately for shared traffic, but eventually includes shoulders for the entire length.
Long-term
65
through route
name shunga trail
endpoints
Shunga Creek at Rice Road (E) to Arrowhead Drive

Scott Magnet School, Ripley Park, Downtown, Expocentre, Shunga Glen Park, Stout ES, Washburn University, Big Shunga Park, Warren Park, Felker Park, KNI, VA, Crestview Park, French MS Topekas premier trail, with recent extension to Deer Creek. Extension under I-470 to French MS via McClure Street. Trail requires gradual improvement/ reconstruction program to address visibility issues at curves and underpasses, resurfacing needs, and widening to separate bike and pedestrian traffic in high use areas. System also requires trail access from Buchanan Street on Route 8 and improved wayfinding.
implementation term
Short-term for west extension, continuing improvement program
t1
t2
landon trail
Shunga Trail junction to California Avenue and south
Urban trail completed in 2011. Main requirements are improved local access to trail, with connections to Betty Phillips Park, Croix Street, Terra Drive
Medium-term for new trail access bridges
t3
Deer Creek Trail
Shunga Trail (N) to Dornwood Park (S)
Extension of Deer Creek Trail from 10th Street south to Dornwood Park, a key element of trail continuity to Lake Shawnee
Short-term, depending on funding.
Dornwood Trail
t4
Dornwood Park to Lake Shawnee Trail
Dornwood Park, Lake Shawnee Park
Trail extension uses a new Wittenberg Road bridge with cycle track access. In short-term, bridge may be signed for shared motorized/bicycle traffic.
Short- to medium-term. High priority regional trail segment, but requires adaptation or replacement of Wittenberg bridge over the Kansas Turnpike.
66
through route
name lake shawnee trail
endpoints
Circumferential trail

Trail serves Lake Shawnee Park. Excellent condition, with primary requirement being redesigning extremely steep incline along 45th Street on south side of lake.
implementation term
Short-term
t5
t6
north levee trail Garfield Park (E) to
Brickyard and Lower Silver Lake Roads
Garfield Park, Oakland via Sardou Avenue bridge, North Topeka industrial areas
Trail on levee top, connecting to Soldier Creek Trail at Garfield Park. River crossing options include a connection to the Sardou Avenue bridge or reuse of a disused railroad bridge east of Kansas Avenue, connecting to River Drive. Railroad bridge provides a better trail option, and reinforces riverfront development in Topeka. Trail along new channel completes North Topeka trail loop
Medium- to long-term
t7
soldier Creek trail
Terminus of existing trail at Lyman Road to Brickyard Road
Youth Center, North Topeka industries
Long-term
t8
south bank trail
Murray Hill Station to Crane Street
Trail on south bank of river, probably predicated on future abandonment of railroad, currently in full operation. Current railroad bridge west of Topeka Boulevard could provide access to Levee Trail.
Long-term
67
68
4 | INFRASTRUC TURE DESIGN CONCEPTS
CHAPTER
inFrastrUCtUre DESIGN CONCEPTS
69
his chapter presents the infrastructure of the topeka bikeways network, including facility types and design guidelines appropriate to the citys various street contexts and environments. these facility types form the building blocks of the network, and become the individual design components of the systems routes.
The Topeka bikeway network will be implemented on the ground by a variety of features: pavement markings, signs, capital projects like paths and trails, and supporting improvements. Each of these is designed to increase the comfort and safety of cyclists traveling along the system, and to encourage prospective riders to use the bicycle for transportation. These solutions are adapted to the characteristics of Topekas streets: their roles in the street system, traffic volumes, widths, parking conditions, urban contexts, intersections, and linkages. In this chapter, we discuss the infrastructure components that are the building blocks of the route network, and present guidelines for their design. In Chapter Five, we show how these elements are assembled route-by-route to create the completed system Facility types in the overall system and its individual routes should be relatively consistent. Because Topeka has many street contexts, the bikeway network combines more than one facility type even along specific routes. However, the system should use a common vocabulary for clarity and should avoid choppiness -- changing frequently from one facility to another or forcing frequent street crossings. Both of these conditions work against the requirements of integrity, comfort, and safety. In addition, it is important to note that, despite these guidelines, individual routes still require specific design. While these guidelines are appropriate to Topekas contexts, they should be flexible and adapted to individual conditions. Some situations are clear enough that guidelines can be applied directly. But in more complex conditions, the guidelines help inform a more customized solution.
Shared streets, in which bicyclists and motor vehicles operate in common right-of-way. These streets usually have relatively low volumes and adequate continuity to be useful parts of the system. In most cases, they have on-street parking and are not wide enough to provide specific space for bicyclists. Shared streets include bicycle boulevards, a special category that uses distinctive signage and design features to distinguish them as facilities that give special attention and even priority to the bicycle. Bicycle lanes, in which bicyclists share the street right-ofway but operate within marked lanes reserved for their use.
Bicycle lanes always provide for one-way movement, in most cases moving in the same direction as motor vehicles. Bicycle lanes are appropriate on streets that can comfortably accommodate bicyclists, but have higher traffic volumes than shared streets; provide adequate width in their current channels for both motor vehicles and bicycles; or as part of new street construction projects that integrate pedestrians, bicycles, and transit into their design (complete streets). Sidepaths or cycle tracks. Sidepaths, referred to in Europe and increasingly in America as cycle tracks, are bicycle paths located within a street right of way but fully separated from travel lanes. These facilities are popular in Europe and are frequently used in the United States, but have been controversial, largely because of potential bicycle-motor vehicle conflicts at intersections of streets and driveways. These facilities are especially useful along the street frontages of major campuses, parks, open spaces, and limited entry developments with long distances and few interruptions. Cycle tracks within street channels that are buffered from moving traffic by parked cars have also gained increased popularity. Multi-use trails. Trails on rights-of-way separated from streets make up most of Topekas existing investment in bicycle facilities, including the Shunga, Landon, and Soldier Creek Trails. Trails following waterways, levees, railroads, campuses, and utility lines will continue to be staples of the bicycle network.
facility types
In general, the Topeka network will use the following types of facilities:
70
7
Facility types with topeka applications
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Shared street with sharrow, Omaha, NE Bike lane on existing street, Boston, MA Complete street conversion, Green Bay, WI Sidepath, Lawrence, KS Cycle track, Cambridge, MA Multi-use trail, Shunga Trail, Topeka Multi-use trail, Lake Shawnee Trail, Topeka
3
71
local shared streets

Shared, low-volume streets will make up the majority of on-street mileage in the Topeka bikeway system. On these streets, bicycles and motor vehicles operate within the same area.
Shared streets will be marked by shared lane markings, or sharrows, a new pavement marking now recognized within the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Sharrows, made up of a bicycle symbol and a directional chevron, fill three primary functions: They provide route continuity for cyclists. The sharrow helps assure riders that they are on the bikeway system and moving along a street that is intended for bicycle use.. Along with other signage, they increase motorist awareness of bicycles on the street. Properly placed, they help bicyclists position themselves safely on a street away from the door zone of adjacent parked cars.
- Low traffic volumes. Streets with average daily traffic (ADT) below 5,000 vehicles per day (vpd), and preferably below 3,000 vpd are most appropriate for shared use. As volumes increase, the number of potential cyclists comfortable riding in the shared street environment will decrease. - Relatively low speeds. The MUTCD recommends that sharrows not be placed on roadways with speed limits over 35 mph. A better maximum speed limit for streets with sharrows for Topeka is 30 mph. - On-street parking. Many low-volume streets have onstreet parallel parking on at least one side. The sharrow is useful in helping bicyclists position themselves away from the hazards of opening car doors. - Inadequate space for bike lanes. Bike lanes, providing reserved space in the street channel for bicyclists, are often desirable, but many streets in the Topeka system are not wide enough to accommodate bike lanes, travel lanes, and on-street parking.
application to topekas street contexts

Characteristics of streets in the Topeka system that adapt to shared use include:
72
These conditions are typically found in the following Topeka street types: Continuous local streets Continuous neighborhood collectors Neighborhood parkways Neighborhood avenue
design contexts In the Topeka system, shared streets will typically range from 25 to 40 feet wide, with parallel parking on at least one side. Figure 4.1 illustrates typical design contexts and sharrow placement dimensions for the Topeka system, with guidelines summarized in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.1. Design Configurations for shared routes Left: Narrow local or neighborhood collector street with two-sided parking. Center: Narrow local or neighborhood collector street with one-sided parking. Right: Wide neighborhood avenue with two-sided parking.
Sharrows may be used on streets with somewhat higher volumes and speeds up to 35 mph where necessary to provide system continuity or to fill short gaps in the network. However, these routes will not be comfortable for all riders.
73
Figure 4.2. Design Guidelines for Shared Routes

Design Condition two-sided parking, 25-31 foot width pavement marking and signage Sharrows with center of chevron a minimum of 11 feet from the face of the curb. typical street type Continuous local, continuous neighborhood collector, neighborhood parkway Continuous local, continuous neighborhood collector, neighborhood parkway Comments
one-sided parking, 25-29 foot width
Sharrows with center of chevron a minimum of 11 feet from the face of curb on the parking side, minimum of 3 feet from face of curb on the no parking side
one-sided parking, 29-32 foot width
Sharrows with center of chevron a minimum of 11 feet from the face of curb on the parking side, minimum of 3 feet from face of curb on the no parking side. Painted white line to define parking lane, with outside edge 8 feet from face of curb Sharrows with center of chevron a minimum of 11 feet from the face of curb on the parking side, minimum of 3 feet from face of curb on the no parking side. Painted white line to define parking lanes, with outside edge 8 feet from face of curb.
Neighborhood collector, neighborhood parkway, neighborhood avenue
White line should be used when the remainder of the street channel is at least 21 feet wide. Parking line helps define parking area and aids in bicyclists positioning themselves safely away from parked cars. In addition, when curbside parking is lightly utilized, the parking lane can serve as an informal bike lane for some cyclists. White line should be used when the remainder of the street channel is at least 21 feet wide. Parking line helps define parking area and aids in bicyclists positioning themselves safely away from parked cars. In addition, when curbside parking is lightly utilized, the parking lane can serve as an informal bike lane for some cyclists.
two-sided parking, 36-40 foot width
Neighborhood avenue
74
bicycle boulevards
Bicycle boulevards are enhanced shared streets that are especially applicable in Topeka with its strong secondary street grid. These streets are direct segments that generally run parallel to higher order streets, and serve the same destinations as busier arterials. Within the system concept, candidates for bicycle boulevard designation include: 11th Street, paralleling the 12th/Huntoon one-way pair. 8th Avenue , paralleling 6th and 10th Avenues between Downtown and Gage Park. 13th/15th Street, paralleling 17th Street between Monroe Street and Gage Boulevard. Belle Avenue, paralleling Fairlawn Road between 10th and the Shunga Trail. Randolph Street, paralleling MacVicker Avenue between 1st and 37th Street. Clay Street, paralleling Washburn/Lane Street between 1st and 27th Street. Arrowhead Drive, paralleling I-470 between 10th and 37th Street. Westport Drive/Wanamaker Drive, paralleling Wanamaker Road between Huntoon and 31st Terrace. Minnesota/Wisconsin Avenue paralleling California Avenue between 21st and 35th. College Avenue between Willow Park and Washburn University. tions discussed above, but include other identifying and functional enhancements. These vary in level of capital investment and complexity, and in relatively ascending order of complexity include: - Signage. Signage has the advantage of being highly visible and low in cost. Bicycle boulevard signs include identification signs (special street signs and bicycle boulevard identifiers) and advisory or caution signs (share-the-road signs). The entire system will also use a common signage system that incorporates identifying, directional, and wayfinding signs, discussed in Chapter Six - Intersection and road priority. Bicycle boulevards should provide reasonable through priority to bicyclists, and by
signage concepts for bicycle boulevards. Signs are the least expensive solution but can be very effective in distinguishing these multi-use streets. Top row: Street signs with bicycle boulevard designations on Wilson Street in Madison (left) and Russell Street in Berkeley. Bottom row: Bicycle boulevard identifier in Berkeley (left) and share the road caution sign in Las Vegas.
Bicycle boulevards utilize the pavement marking conven-
75
increasing levels of intensity or investment on bicycle boulevards. Left: Bicycle priority sign on Wilson Street bicycle boulevard in Madison. Center: Mini-traffic circle in Berkeley. Right: Hybrid beacon signal in Tucson
extension other users of the street. These include turning stop signs, stopping cross streets in favor of bicyclists and other users of the boulevard, and installing signs that explicitly give priority to cyclists. Traffic calmers. These features slow motor vehicle traffic at key points to equalize speeds between bicycles and cars. These techniques include corner nodes with well-defined crosswalks, mini traffic circles, speed tables, and patterned or textured pavements at crosswalks or in intersections. In addition to aiding bicyclists, they also provide a better pedestrian environment and tend to discourage unwanted through traffic from using continuous neighborhood streets. Consequently, neighborhood residents frequently support installation of these features. Arterial street crossing installations. These features at crossings of bicycle boulevards and major streets help bicyclists cross arterials and preserve system continuity and safety. Techniques include installation or tuning of induction loops sensitive enough to detect bicycles; pedestrian and
bicyclist activated hybrid beacons, possibly using bicycle loop detectors; and crossing refuge medians, short medians that allow bicyclists and pedestrians to negotiate one direction of traffic at a time. A special bicycle symbol is marked on the pavement to emphasize the point where the loop detects bicycles. Topeka installed its first hybrid beacon at the Landon Trail crossing with 29th Street. Traffic Diversion. These are physical projects that change traffic pattens by preventing motor vehicle access onto a block while permitting through bicycle access. A diversion device every half-mile on continuous local streets will force through traffic to parallel arterials, while maintaining good access for residents into and out of residential areas. Naturally, bicycle boulevard techniques can also be utilized on other shared streets.
76
arterial street crossings for bicycle boulevards. Top: Crossing median concept for traffic diversion in berkeley. These cholkers permit bicycle traffic into the continuous boulevard but prevent or limit motor vehicle entry. urban corridor by RDG. Above: Median installation in Las Vegas.
77
bike lanes
Bike lanes provide reserved (but not always exclusive) space for bicyclists operating within the street channel. Because they delineate a specific area for bicyclists, bike lanes provide an on-street environment both safer and more comfortable for cyclists on higher volume and/or higher speed roads than shared streets. The Topeka Bikeways Survey clearly indicated that bike lanes provided a preferred facility for many prospective cyclists.
Urban streets experience a number of demands that create potential conflicts, including traffic volume, on-street parking, and turning movements. Parking is a key variable that affects both the amount of right-of-way needed to accommodate bike lanes and the safe design of facilities. In Topeka, bike lanes will occur on both two-way and oneway streets with different parking configurations. In addition, they will be added to streets in three different ways: - Retrofits of existing streets. These projects, involving the least cost and difficulty, will reconfigure existing right-ofway to provide bike lanes as well as adequate capacity to meet traffic demands. - Minor street widenings. These projects would widen existing street channels to add bike lanes, and may also adjust existing travel lanes. - New streets or street reconstructions. These major investments address streets that need reconstruction to meet traffic demands or new corridors, anticipating develop-
ment as complete streets, designed to accommodate all modes of travel.
application to topekas street contexts

Characteristics of streets in the Topeka system that adapt to bike lanes include: - Higher traffic volumes. Bike lanes become more necessary as volumes increase, typically applying to streets with average daily traffic above 3,000 to 5,000 vehicles per day. These higher volumes require greater degrees of separation to maintain comfort for a maximum number of cyclists. - Medium speeds. Speed differentials are generally more important than traffic volume in determing the application of bike lanes. However, lanes are most appropriately utilized on streets with typical speeds between 25 and 45 miles per hour. Above 45 mph, margins for error and, consequently, user comfort and safety decline.
78
- On-street parking. Many candidate streets for bike lanes in Topekas urban settings also provide on-street parking. Adequate space must be provided to avoid hazards from opening car doors. - One-way and two-way environments. Topekas one-way streets include wide downtown facilities with more lane capacity than traffic requires. In these situations, a bike lane is provided with relative ease and little impact on traffic. Topeka also includes longer distance, two-lane oneway pairs (12th/Huntoon, Washburn/Lane) that provide direct routes but difficult design challenges. These conditions are typically found in the following To-
peka street types: Transit and civic avenues Neighborhood arterial Mixed use arterial Mixed use boulevard One-way pairs Downtown multi-lane Downtown boulevard
Figure 4.3. Design Dimensions for Bike lanes on two-way streets Left: Two-lane, two-way traffic with parking on both sides. Center: Two-lane, two-way traffic with one-sided parking. Right: Two-lane, two-way traffic with no curbside parking. Additional travel lanes increase street width proportionately.
overall design guidelines

In the Topeka system, streets with bike lanes may vary in width from 30 to 80 feet, reflecting the citys diverse set-
79
Figure 4.4. Design Dimensions for Bike lanes on one-way streets and with Diagonal Parking Left: Two-lane, one-way traffic with parking on one side (Washburn/Lane and 12th/Huntoon one-way pairs. Changing sections and parking configurations on these streets complicates design, and street widths do not uniformly accommodate bike lanes. On westbound 12th, a left-hand bike lane accommodates existing off-street parking on the right-hand peak hour travel lane. Center: Conversion of an existing multilane one-way street by replacing one travel lane with a buffered bike lane. Right: Diagonal parking adjacent to a bike lane should be converted to back-in diagonal parking for better visibility.
tings from relatively narrow corridors to wide downtown avenues. Figures 4.3 and 4.4 illustrates typical design contexts and bike lane dimensions for the Topeka system, with guidelines summarized in Figure 4.5. However, general design principles include the following: Bike lanes must always operate in a single direction, flowing with traffic.
Normally, bike lanes will be located on the right-hand side of the street, consistent with traffic conventions and motorist expectations. Some large cities locate bike lanes on the left-hand side to avoid conflicts with buses and taxis, and to minimize car-door zone conflicts. However, these conditions generally do not occur in Topeka. The 12th/Huntoon pair presents an exception to this principle because of permitted off-peak parking in the right-hand travel lane. In this situation, a bike lane on the left-hand side of the street maintains current onand off-peak traffic flow conditions. Bike lane pavement markings should be used at the entrance and departure of each intersection.
Bike lanes will typically be provided on both sides of two-way streets. Lanes on one-side only may invite inexperienced cyclists to use them in the wrong direction. In situations where bike lanes are needed but right-of-way only accommodates a single directional lane, a sharrow should be used in the opposite direction. The bike lane should be provided in the direction most likely to slow or create conflicts with other traffic, such as an uphill grade.
80
Figure 4.5. Design Guidelines for Bike Lanes

Design Condition two-way traffic , two-sided parking bike lane, parking lane, and total street width Standard of 8 foot parking lanes with 5 foot bike lanes. In constrained settings, a 12 foot combined parking/bike lane may be considered. Total minimum street width (face to face of curb: 46-48 feet for two-lane plus 11 feet for each additional travel lane. two-way traffic, one-sided parking Transit and civic Standard of 8 foot parking lanes with avenues, neighborhood 5 foot bike lane on parking side. In constrained settings, a 12 foot combined arterial parking/bike lane may be considered. Four foot bike lane is minimum on the non-parking side, excluding gutter pans. Total minimum street width (face to face of curb: 39 feet for two-lane plus 11 feet for each additional travel lane. two-way traffic, no parking Four-foot minimum bike lanes, excluding gutter pan. On major streets with higher volume and speed, bike lane width should increase to 5- to 7-feet, depending on street character and speed limits. Total minimum street width (face to face of curb: 30-32 feet for two-lane plus 11 feet for each additional travel lane. General notes: 1. Typical recommended placement of standard bike lane pavement markings is at the entrance and departure from each intersection. 2. Standard bike lane sign (R3-17) may be placed with an AHEAD plaque at the approach to the lane and with an END plaque at the terminus of the lane. Pavement markings should be used more frequently than signs and marking locations should be coincident where possible. Transit and civic avenues, neighborhood arterial, mixed use boulevard, mixed use arterial Supporting information should advise cyclists to ride in the left-hand part of the bike lane. Four foot bike lanes are acceptable in constrained situations with a minimum 8 foot parking lane. typical street type Transit and civic avenues, neighborhood arterial, mixed use boulevard Comments Supporting information should advise cyclists to ride in the left-hand part of the bike lane. Four foot bike lanes are acceptable in constrained situations with a minimum 8 foot parking lane.
81
Figure 4.5. Design Guidelines for Bike Lanes in Special Topeka Contexts
Design Condition one-way traffic , one-sided parking (12th/huntoon, washburn/lane pairs, and 4th/5th pairs) bike lane, parking lane, and total street width Standard of 8 foot parking lanes with 5 foot bike lanes on parking side. A 12 foot combined parking/ bike lane may be considered. Minimum four foot bike lane on the non-parking side, excluding gutter pans. Bike lanes may be used interchangeably with sharrows, depending on conditions on individual blocks. Bike lane should be located in left-hand lane if righthand lane permits off-peak parking. Parking use reduces street to one through lane, and left-hand bike lane does not affect operation. Total minimum street width (face to face of curb: 28 feet for two-lane with off-peak parking permitted in one travel lane. one-way traffic, two-sided parking (4th, 5th, 8th, 10th avenues) Removal of one travel lane, reconfiguring street with Downtown multian 8 foot parking lane, 5 foot bike lane and 2-3 foot lane buffer between bike lane and adjacent travel lane. typical street type One-way pairs Comments
one- or two-way with diagonal parking (Downtown streets, huntoon street at westboro mart)
Five-foot minimum bike lanes with diagonal stalls of adequate length to avoid encroaching into the bike lane. Back-in diagonal parking for stalls adjacent to bike lanes.
Downtown multilane, downtown boulevard
Conventional head-in diagonal parking is not recommended adjacent to bike lanes. because of poor visibility. Back-in diagonal parking is being used successfully in many cities, and is recommended in Topeka when this condition exists. Back-in diagonal also provides greater safety to motorists pulling out of stalls, directs pedestrians leaving a vehicle to the sidewalk, and eases loading.
82
intersection design
Intersection design is important to the safe operation of on-street facilities. Consistent practices should address conflicts between turning traffic and bicyclists proceeding straight ahead. In urban bicycling situations, bicyclists are advised to position themselves in the right-hand third of the lane that serves their destination. While this maximizes safety, many cyclists tend to move to the extreme right of an intersection, placing them in a position to be hit by turning motor vehicles. In addition, Topeka has many offset intersections, where a local or collector street does not align directly north and south of an intersecting arterial.
buffered bicycle lane. Separation is provided by a crosshatched neutral ground in this application in New York City.
Intersection solutions for on-street bicycle facilities include: Typical pavement markings. Right-Turn Pockets Bike Boxes for Left Turns Intersection Offsets Intersection treatments recommended for bicycle boulevards, including refuge medians, are also applicable to streets with bike lanes. typical intersection markings Figure 4.6 illustrates typical pavement markings in various situations including intersections. Problems have emerged with bike lane installations that maintain solid lines up to the intersection. This encourages some cyclists to consider the bike lane to be inviolate, and opens them to the possibility of being hit by right-turning traffic. In response, current practice is to replace the solid white line with a dashed line, suggesting that the lane alignment should not be rigidly followed. This also encourages cyclists to behave like other traffic by leaving the right-hand bike lane to make left turns.
back-in diagonal parking. This concept has proven successful here in Downtown Des Moines and other cities.
83
Figure 4.6. recommended lane markings at typical intersections
Figure 4.7. recommended lane markings at right turn only lanes
right-turn pockets Some major intersections include right-turn only lanes to allow right turns on red signals or otherwise separate right turning movements from the direct flow of traffic. This creates a potential issue for bicyclists who are used to positioning themselves as far to the right as practicable in the language of many state laws, again exposing themselves to collision with right-turning motor vehicles. Figure 4.7 illustrates the recommended pavement markings position the bicyclists continuing straight ahead to the left of the RTO lane, providing a dashed stripe through the conflict zone. The solid stripe resumes on the other side of this conflict zone. Many cities are coloring the surface of this zone to increase motorist awareness of a potential collision hazard, A standard sign, advising motorists to yield to bikes on a direct route (R4-4) should also be installed. bicycle boxes for left turns Bicycle boxes are used at signalized intersections to extend a bike lane to the front of a traffic queue. The box sets the stop bar for motor vehicles behind the stopped bicycles. They provide clear visibility for bicyclists, minimize the problem of cyclists hugging the right-hand curb, and expedite left-turning bicycle movements. The boxes are defined by stripes and may be colored for greater visibility. Recommended depth of the box is 14 feet from the edge of the crosswalk. offset intersections While Topeka enjoys the benefits of a good local street grid, many of these streets are offset as they cross major arterials, typically at section lines. Some of these intersecbicycle box on commonwealth avenue in boston. Bike lanes here are on the left side of the street channel, adjacent to the median.
Source: AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Bicycle Facilities, February, 2010 Draft
84
tions are controlled by stop signs while others have signals at one of the intersection legs. These offsets place through cyclists on continuous, low-volume routes in a precarious position, often forcing them to attempt to join the traffic stream on the primary street. Figure 4.8 illustrates three concepts that address this barrier issue. At low volume intersections, using chevrons to define the bike route is satisfactory. At unsignalized intersections with major arterials, a short one-way track allows the cyclist to track a straight line across the intersection and continue to the opposite leg without being forced into a heavy traffic stream. At signalized intersections, a two-way track aligns the cyclist with the continuation of the bike route.
developing bike lanes in the network

As mentioned above, bike lane installations in the Topeka system will be implemented in three ways: retrofits to existing streets, minor widenings, and major construction or reconstruction to complete street standards. This discussion considers how these three techniques apply to the Topeka bikeways network. Retrofits Street retrofits with bike lanes are relatively inexpensive projects because they simply reconfigure the existing road section without significant capital construction. Retrofits can be accomplished by: Adding bike lanes by using excess street width. Road diets. Parking and lane reconfigurations
1
figure 4.8. crossing offset intersections. Concepts are designed for three different situations. Case (1) illustrates an offset crossing with low cross traffic, where use of chevrons to mark a path through the intersection is sufficient. Case (2) illustrates an unsignalized intersection with a major street, employing a one-way cycle track to permit the cyclist to ride directly across the intersection and proceed without merging into the traffic stream. Case (3) addresses a signalized intersection, aligning the cyclist using the nonsignalized leg to align with the signal and proceed on green across the street.
Using Excess Width Some streets in the Topeka system are wide enough that
85
Lane reduction. Lane reductions are most applicable on older four-lane facilities without left turn lanes with ADTs that no longer require a multi-lane facility. Reduction to a three-lane section, providing a capacity of 16,000 vpd, can provide additional space for bike lanes in both directions, as well as managing traffic speeds. Parking and Lane Reconfigurations
Draw bike lanes with reverse diagonals

Retrofits within existing street channels in Downtown Topeka. Both Van Buren (left) and 6th Avenue are included in the system concept and can be easily modified to include bike lanes with little change to existing traffic.
bike lanes can be added no significant change in the existing street layout. Examples include 6th Avenue between Golden and Branner and between I-70 and Tyler; 25th Street east of California Avenue; Seward Avenue between Golden and Branner; and Van Buren between 4th and the Capitol. Segments of the Lane/Washburn pair can also accommodate bike lanes adjacent to parking. Bike lanes on these streets also have the advantage of managing traffic, reducing speeds to desirable levels, and preventing passing on the right. Road Diets Road diets may have some applicability in Topeka, based on actual lane dimensions. Two principal strategies for road diets include: Lane narrowing. In certain cases, space for a bike lane in at least one direction may be obtained by narrowing travel lanes from 12 or more feet to 11 feet. When room exists under this strategy for only one lane, the opposite direction should be accommodated with a cycle track or, at minimum, a shared lane.
Parking reconfigurations pick up road space by consolidating existing on-street parking. In these situations, which may involve neighborhood collectors such as 8th Avenue and 1st Avenue, underutilized two-sided parking is combined on one side of the street. On streets in excess of 35 feet wide, this provides an opportunity for a bike lane on one side of the street and a shared lane with a painted parking lane in the opposite direction. A lane reconfiguration may change the location of lanes on the street to accommodate mixed traffic. For example, on westbound 12th Street, where off-peak parking is permitted along the right-hand travel lane, a possible reconfiguration option could place a combined parking/peak hour travel lane on the left side of the street, while providing a continuous bike lane on the right side. Parking reconfigurations can have significant neighborhood impact and should be done only in close consultation with residents and businesses along a street. Minor Widenings. Minor widenings include construction of dual purpose paved shoulders on streets without curbs or relocating curbs on urban streets, most feasible as part of another improvement project. Candidate streets for shoulder construction include 37th Street between I-470 and Lake Shawnee; Golden Avenue south of Shunga Creek; Strait Avenue between Seward and Thomas; Tyler Street north of Laurent Street; River Road from 1st Avenue to Oakland
Lane reconfiguration concept for 12th street. This concept includes a bike lane on the right-hand side of the street, shifting the peak hour travel/off-peak parking lane to the left side.
86
Park; other North Topeka rural section roads like Rochester Street, NW 46th Street, Brickyard Road, Lower Silver Lake Road, and Lyman Road; 37th Street from Wanamaker Road to Nottingham Road; and several others. Shoulder bikeways should be 6 feet wide to accommodate bicycles and disabled vehicles comfortably on these relatively high speed corridors. Shoulders should also be marked with bike lane pavement markings. Urban widening may be appropriate for 17th Street, a three-lane facility with very narrow lanes. major reconstructions/complete streets These major projects include either new corridors or upgrades to existing obsolete streets that no longer meet traffic requirements. They would be upgraded to complete street standards, providing bike lanes or comparable facilities. Because complete streets may also include off-road facilities, recommended guidelines are presented later in the discussion of sidepaths and cycle tracks. In the Topeka system, complete street segments include: 10th Avenue from Gage Boulevard to Urish Road. 6th Avenue from Gage Boulevard to Wanamker Road. Urish Road from 6th Avenue to Nottingham Road. Wanamaker Road from 31st Terrace to 53rd Street. Elevation Parkway, a planned new corridor from Wanamaker Road to 37th and Randolph.
complete street redesign. Military Avenue in Green Bay, Wisconsin was both road dieted, downsizing from six to four travel lanes, and reconceived as a complete street. This concept features bike lanes and colored concrete crosswalks and is viewed as both a transportation improvement and an economic development tool.
87
Figure 4.9. typical complete street sections

section type sidewalk/ sidepath 10 5 10 10 10 5 10 parkway setback 6 6 6 6 12 8 8 bicycle lane or shoulder 5 5 5 5 7 5 5 Cartway bicycle lane or shoulder 5 5 5 5 7 5 5 parkway setback 6 6 6 6 12 8 8 sidewalk/ sidepath 5 5 10 5 5 5 5 total minimum row 76 65 75 70 117 91 101 Figure 4.11. (right) three-lane sections: From left, bike lanes; one-way sidepath without bike lanes; and two-way sidepath with bike lanes.
2 lane divided with sidepath 3 lane, no sidepath (35 mph) 3 lane, 1-way sidepaths (35 mph) 3 lane, 2-way sidepath (35 mph) 4 lane divided, 2-way sidepath (45 mph) 5-lane, no sidepath (35 mph) 5-lane, 1-way sidepaths (35 mph)
40 33 33 33 64 55 55
Figure 4.10. two-lane divided section with sidepath
Figure 4.12: Four-lane divided section with sidepath
88
Figure 4.10. Five-lane sections: Far left from top: bike lanes; and oneway cycle tracks with bike lanes. Left from top: One-way sidepaths with bike lanes; two-way sidepath with bike lanes
89
cycle tracks/ sidepaths

Cycle tracks are paths separated from the stream of traffic but within the right-of-way of a street or road. They are a staple of European bicycle systems, but are controversial among facility designers and urban bicyclists. They present significant challenges at intersections but allow cyclists to operate comfortably on direct major routes. As such, they have a distinct role in the Topeka network.
Objections to the use of cycle tracks or sidepaths (these terms will be used interchangeably here) in this country are based on conflicts with dominant motor vehicle traffic and include: Hazardous intersections. On two-way paths, motorists do not expect, and often do not see, bicyclists in the counterflow direction. Right-turning motorists in many cases ignore path users moving straight ahead, creating the possibility of a crash. This always places path users on the defensive. Right-of-way ambiguities at driveways and intersections. Usually, cyclists on a sidepath along a major street are forced to yield to intersecting traffic. Cyclists traveling on streets, on the other hand, have the same right of way rights as motorists. Path blockages. Cross traffic on driveways and intersecting streets frequently blocks the sidepath by stopping across it.
variations on the cycle track theme. Top left: Separated paths along the Topeka Boulevard bridge were rated high as comfortable settings by survey participants. Top: An urban cycle path in Amsterdam. Above: A popular cycle path in New Yorks East Village, with parking buffering cyclists from moving motor vehicles.
As a result, experienced cyclists usually prefer on-road
90
facilities to roadside facilities. Yet, sidepaths, despite their shortcomings, are used frequently and remain popular with many users. Sidepath images were also rated highly for level of comfort by participants in the Topeka Bikeways Survey. Many cyclists justifiably fear rear-end (or overtaking)crashes or distracted drivers wandering into even a well-designed bicycle lane. Sidepaths accommodate pedestrians and other wheeled users who cannot use streets. Also, auto-era development replaced the traditional grid of local streets with cul-de-sacs and short curvilinear streets, causing through connections to depend solely on the arterial system. Sidepaths along major streets provide continuity where other alternatives, including trails or parallel local streets, are not available. Cycle tracks are integral to the national bicycle system of the Netherlands, one of the worlds premier cycling countries, and work because of careful design and motorist respect and acceptance of bicyclists. While research on American sidepath safety is scarce, a recent Harvard University study based on the Montreal system compared crash rates on sidepaths to on-street facilities. It suggested that sidepaths had higher crash rates at intersections and lower rates along their main line, producing about the same overall crash rates as on-street facilities. Since crashes at speed in mid-block areas have a higher probability of fatality than lower speed crashes at intersections, the study indicated that these facilities should not be excluded from urban bicycle systems in this country. They do in fact have a strategic role to play in the Topeka network.
ments do not exist. Complete streets should include both on-street facilities and paths for pedestrians and bicyclists who are uncomfortable with riding even in protected, onstreet bike lanes. Innovative concepts, like one-way cycle tracks on new or existing streets, can combine the safety benefits of off-road riding between intersections and vehicular cycling through intersections. The objective of sidepath design guidelines should be to make these facilities as safe as possible, specifically by addressing their greatest weakness: road and driveway intersections. Sidepaths are safest when driveway and cross-street interruptions are fewest. Therefore, they work best along arterial streets that have long stretches of relatively uninterrupted frontage, like parks, campuses, and cemeteries. Topeka has a number of such strategic opportunities, including features like Gage Park, Washburn University, the VA/KNI campuses, the McFarland Farms development, and Mount Hope Cemetery. When used along streets, access management becomes especially important, Contemporary cycle tracks, where an on-street path is provided along a curb and separated from moving traffic by buffering and parking, should be considered in downtown settings as an alternative to bike lanes.
figure 4.9. sidepath (cycle track) sections. Sidepath width and construction standards are similar to those for multiuse trails. Top: Two-way sidepath along an arterial, a typical accommodation on contemporary streets. Above: One-way cycle track concept separates pedestrian from bicycle traffic. Bicycles move in the direction of traffic.
application to the topeka system

Conventional multi-use sidepaths, typically wide paths parallel to arterial streets, should in most cases complement rather than replace on-road facilities if on-road facilities are feasible. Their primary purpose in the Topeka system is to provide continuity where alternatives that meet the six performance require-
design guidelines for cycle tracks/sidepaths

pathway standards Cycle tracks and sidepaths may be developed as two- or one-way facilities. Most US applications of off-road sidepaths are two-way facilities, adhering to a standard tenfoot width, typical of other multi-use trails. A one-way cycle track combined with a sidewalk should separate ter-
91
ritory allocated to bicyclists and pedestrians, and include directional markings for bicyclists. These territories can be defined by paint or changes in pavement color. Minimum width for a one-way cycle track is four feet (five feet recommended) with an adjacent pedestrian path of similar width. Structure and materials for sidepaths should follow standards for multi-use trails on separated right-of-way. pathway setbacks Research conducted for the Florida Department of Transportation indicates that, to maximize safety, separation of the sidepath from a roadway should increase as road speeds increase. The Florida data suggest that at lower adjacent road speeds, a smaller separation produces crash rates lower than those of the adjacent road, while that threshold is reached at greater separations for high speed facilities. AASHTO 2010 recommends a minimum separation of five feet without a physical barrier. Figure 4.10 displays a standard separation for sidepaths based on the Florida findings. access management Access management makes sidepaths safer. There is no one clear standard for frequency of access points. Reasonable guidance is provided by the Idaho Department of Transportation, recommending a maximum of eight crossFigure 4.10. separation for roadside paths
sidepaths and cycle tracks. Top: Twoway sidepath typical of US multi-modal projects, US 40 in Lawrence. Middle: Broadway in Boulder, CO, defining pedestrian and bicycle domains along a roadside trail. Lower: One-way cycle track and pedestrian path in Amsterdam.
ings per mile, with a preferred maximum of five crossings per mile. This access management policy should apply to the primarily arterial streets proposed for these three corridors. sidepath concepts and adjacent roadway character As mentioned earlier, two-way sidepaths, in common use in American road design as bike paths, set up an unexpected counterflow direction that creates the possibility of crashes. Florida DOT research indicates that two-way sidepaths appear safer along 2- and 3-lane roadways and less safe along multi-lane roads with 2 or more lanes in each direction. In addition to the higher speeds typical of wider roads, this phenomenon can be explained by: - The field of vision of motorists opposite the sidepath. On wider roadways, motorists cannot see or are less aware of a sidepath on the opposite side, creating a particular crash hazard between path users and left-turning traffic. - Motorists exiting intersecting driveways or streets are looking for oncoming traffic at a shallower angle because of the greater street width, directing attention away from the already unexpected sidepath traffic to their right. The previously discussed Harvard study on the Montreal system also suggests that sidepaths are safer than on-street operation between intersections, but more hazardous at street crossings. The one-way cycle track, in combination with bicycle lanes or shoulders on the adjacent road, addresses these issues. (Figure 4.11) Before reaching a major intersection, the cycle track is directed to and merges into the bicycle lane which, at major intersections, is located to the left of a right-turn only (RTO) lane. Inexperienced bicyclists have the option of becoming pedestrians and using the crosswalk. Thus, one-way sidepath concept combines the relative mid-block security of the sidepath to many us-
Adjacent Road Speed Limit (mph)
Recommended Sidepath Separation (feet)
35 45 55
5-8 12-14 20-24
92
ers with the safer options of behaving like other vehicles or as pedestrians at street intersections. The one-way sidepath should be considered: Along four-lane divided or five-lane corridors with local street accesses, including major upcoming Topeka projects such as 10th Avenue and South Wanamaker Road. When a sidepath is recommended but, for various reasons, access cannot be closely managed.
design of in-line crossings at driveways and streets Cycle tracks/sidepaths and multi-use trails share design characteristics at intersections. Guidelines for multi-use trails are presented later in this section. However, roadside facilities have special problems not experienced by the largely grade-separated trail system. Recommendations for the special conditions presented by sidepath crossings are presented here. Ramp Design Curb/intersection cuts or ramps must be logical and in the direct travel line of bicyclists. We suggest avoiding the common practice of placing the ramp on a diagonal at the corner, tending to direct users into the middle of the intersection rather than to a crossing. A design that places a curb in the direct travel line of bicyclists is hazardous. The intersection area must be free of obstructions, such as poles for traffic signal mast arms or lighting standards.
Separation Distance The separation of the trail crossing from the edge of the roadway is a troublesome issue. Some sidepath designs
figure 4.11 one-Way sidepath concept. A system of paired one-way sidepaths can minimize some of the operating hazards of two-way paths in certain settings. The one-way sidepath concept can be used both on streets both without (top) and with bike lanes. Without bike lanes, the cycle track is the streets bicycle facility, but becomes a bike lane as it enters the intersections. If bike lanes are provided along the street, the cycle track merges into the bike lane. Left: Merger from street to one-way cycle track at Vassar Street cycle track on the MIT campus in Cambridge.
93
put users in serious jeopardy by placement that either provides poor visibility or inadequate reaction time. Based on specifications in Finland and the Netherlands, where sidepaths are prevalent, the Florida DOTs path intersection design manual proposes three discreet and mutually exclusive separation distance categories: 1-2 meters 5-10 meters more than 30 meters These distances are based on the interaction of five variables: motor vehicle turning speed, stacking distance, driver and/or pathway user awareness, and chance of pathway right-of-way priority. These categories are designed to prevent awkward conditions that may impair visibility and not give either the trail user or motorist opportunity to respond. Figure 4.11 summarizes the relative performance of each placement for these variables. Defining Crossings All crossings across streets and major driveways should be clearly defined. Street intersection markings should
utilize standard zebra or ladder markings incorporated at mid-block crossings and other major intersections. Colored concrete or asphalt surface treatments may also be used. A simpler dashed crosswalk boundary may be used as a convention at driveway crossings. At intersections controlled by stop signs or signals, stop bars should be provided for motor vehicles ahead of the crosswalk to discourage motorists from obstructing the path. Surface triangles that indicate a motorist yield may be used in place of stop bars. Unfortunately, many American motorists do not understand this marking. Signage Use warning signs along roads with sidepaths similar to advisories for parallel railroad tracks. This provides motorists with a background awareness of the parallel sidepath. Right-of-Way Assignment Ideally, pathway users paralleling a street with right-of-way priority should share that priority. However, sidepath users must be advised to ride defensively, and assume that they
Figure 4.11. sidepath separation from roadway: performance at intersections

poor sidepath intersection design. Top: Ramps are narrow and located off line from a bicyclists normal path, creating a potential hazard. Above: The base of a signal mast arm obstructs the logical path through the ramp.
Parameter
1-2m 0-6.56 feet Lowest None Higher Higher Higher
5-10m 16.4-32.8 feet Higher Yes, better at higher separation Lower Lower Lower
over 30m over 98.4 feet Highest Yes High or Low Highest Lowest
Motor vehicle turning speed Motor vehicle stacking space Driver awareness of path user Path user awareness of driver Chance of pathway ROW priority
Source: Intersection Design Manual, Florida Department of Transportation
94
will often be forced to yield the right-of-way. Overly frequent stop signs will cause many path users to ignore the traffic control entirely. The Florida manual states that path users may be intolerant to delay, wish to maintain momentum, or have limited traffic knowledge. When stop signs are installed on a path at extremely low volume intersections or even driveways, path users tend to disregard them. The wheeled user cyclist or skater is, in effect, being taught this dangerous behavior by these crying wolf signs since he or she thinks there is little chance of cross traffic. Intersection Geometrics In addition to crossing visibility and access management techniques, the 2010 AASHTO draft advises the following design measures to address intersection and driveway crossing safety: Intersection and driveway design to reduce speed and heighten driver awareness of path users through tighter corner radii, avoidance of high-speed free flow movements, median refuge islands, and good sight lines. Design measures to reduce pathway user speed at intersection approaches, being certain that designs do not create hazards. Calming traffic speeds on the adjacent roadway. Designs that encourage good cyclist access between roadway and sidepaths at intersections. Keep approaches to sidepaths clear of obstructions, including stopped motor vehicles, through stopbars and yield markings. Signal Cycles Avoid permissive left turns on busy parallel roads and sidepath crossings. Use a protected left-turn cycle with a sidepath-oriented bicycle/pedestrian signal, giving a red signal to the sidepath user when left turns are permitted. Prohibit right turns on red at intersections with a major sidepath crossing.
Crossing Definition. Sidepath/cycle track crossings should be defined for maximum visibility. Colored or textured surfaces can be effective in these situations. A clear stop bar should also be used with advisory signage, to discourage motorists from blocking the track. sidepath advisory sign. Variation of the MUTCDs Railroad Advance Warning Sign, modified as a sidepath advisory. This sign should be used on both sides of a road with sidepaths. This installation is on Speer Boulevard in Denver, advising of the parallel Cherry Creek Trail. Florida DOT advises a similar sign. Crossing Definition Treatments. From left: StreetPrint, an imprint and coloring applied to heated asphalt paving on the New Berlin Trail near Waukesha, Wisconsin.; Colored concrete on Military Avenue in Green Bay.
95
on-street cycle tracks

The discussion above has focused on off-road sidepaths and cycle tracks paths separated from the road and usually above a curb. However, on-road cycle tracks, imported from Dutch and Danish practice, are gaining greater popularity in America and can provide excellent environments for urban cycling. Features of these cycle tracks include: Buffering from travel lanes, usually by parking and physical space defined by paint, bollards, or median. These cycle tracks invert the typical position of parking and bike lanes, and keep the motor vehicle domain contiguous. One-way operation. Some examples of two-way cycle tracks have been developed, often on the outside of major parks or open spaces. An example is the controversial but very effective cycle track along Prospect Park in Brooklyn. However, most facilities provide oneway operation for clarity, greater pedestrian safety, and reduction of conflicts. Special signalization. Many on-street cycle tracks provide special signal cycles for bicycles, to prevent turning cars from cutting off cyclists proceeding ahead on a green light. Very good visibility at intersections. Parking is stopped at sufficient distance from the intersection to provide good visibility.
Boulevard. Figure 4.12 illustrates dimensional standards for such a facility.
Urban Bikeway Design Guide

April 2011 Edition

sources. Sources that establish detailed standards for the design of bicycle facilities include the recent Urban Bikeway Design Guide (National Association of City Transportation Officials, 2011), the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Federal Highway Administration, 2009), and the draft AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Bicycle Facilities (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2010). Designers of facilities should use these primary sources. The guidelines and standards included in this plan are intended to provide guidance that augments these authoritative standards to specific situations within a Topeka bikeways network.
Advantages of the on-street cycle track over bike lanes are elimination of conflicts between parked vehicles and cyclists, including door hazards and backing movements out of diagonal spaces. As such, on-street cycle tracks may substitute for a bike lane on a road dieted one-way street, be incorporated into a reconstruction of Kansas Avenue through the downtown center, or be used on the wide portion of 6th Avenue between Monroe and Topeka
figure 4.12. on-street cycle track. This facility type inverts the usual location of parking and bicyclists, reducing conflicts between bicycle movements and adjacent parked cars.
96
on-street cycle tracks. Clockwise from top left: Two-way cycle track along Prospect Park in Brooklyn; new facility in Cambridge; 2nd Avenue in Manhattan; 9th Avenue in Manhattan, the nations first true cycle track project.
97
multi-use trails
Multi-use trails are the foundation of Topekas current bikeway system and the city is opening or building important new extensions in 2011. Trail-related projects include improvements to venerable assets like the Shunga Trail and development of new trails with demonstrable transportation benefits.
The Topeka Bikeways system will make extensive use of multi-use trails on separated rights-of-way. The citys existing trails have important transportation functions, serving both commuters to the downtown area via the Shunga/ Landon trail system, and recreational trips, most notably on the Shunga which connects major activity centers along Shunganunga Creek. Anticipated trail projects fit within three categories: Improvements to existing trails, most notably the Shunga Trail. This heavily-used trail has several problems that need attention, particularly in its older, central Topeka segments. New trail segments to connect on-street routes. These relatively short, strategic links tie the system together. Major new trails that will become major transportation corridors.
trails with different functions. The Shunga Trail (left), linking many of the citys neighborhoods and parks with the central business district fills many purposes, including commuting. Trail investment policy should help it serve these multiple purposes more safely and enjoyably for all users by using current knowledge to improve design and provide separate facilities in congested areas for conflicting users like through cyclists and strolling pedestrians. The Lake Shawnee Trail (right) today is largely a recreational facility because it is disconnected from the rest of the system. However, a linkage to the Deer Creek Trail via Dornwood Park would increase its usefulness fro transportation.
design guidelines for multi-use trails

Standards for multi-use trail construction are established through past experience in the city, and contemporary practices are reflected in recent trail design, including the Shunga Trail extension, the Lake Shawnee Trail, and the Landon Trail. Many of these guidelines are included in this part of the bikeways plan, along with others that reflect contemporary practice.
Individual trail projects are discussed in detail in the route by route analysis in the following chapter.
98
Figure 4.13. attributes of trail surfaces Figure 7.1: trail surface comparisons
Surface Advantages Natural materials, more durable than soil, low cost, relatively smooth surface Natural material, firm and smooth surface, moderate cost, multiple use Hard surface, smooth with low resistance, stable, low maintenance when properly installed, multiple use Hardest surface, easy to form, lowest maintenance, best cold weather surface, freeze-thaw resistance for volunteers to build and maintain Disadvantages Uneven wear, erodible, difficulty in achieving correct mix. Erodible in storms, needs regular maintenance to maintain surface, discourages on-line skaters and some wheeled users Relatively high installation cost, requires periodic resurfacing, freeze/thaw vulnerability, petroleum based material, construction access and impact Highest installation and repair cost, construction access and impact Dusty, ruts, limited use, unsightly if not maintained, not accessible Decomposes when wet, requires regular maintenance and replenishment, not accessible High cost, uncertain performance
Soil Cement Granular Stone Asphalt
Concrete
Native Soil Natural material, very low cost, low maintenance, easy
filling gaps. A trail along this short segment of a Shunga Creek tributary under I-470 links the Wood Valley neighborhood with the Randolph bikeway and the Shunga Trail system. This is an example of a small investment that can generate enormous benefits for a major part of town.
Wood Chips Recycled Materials
Natural material, good walking surface, moderate cost Good use of materials, surface can be adequate
ada/aashto compliance Trails should comply with American Association of Street and Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards and Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards and the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines. The new AASHTO manual is still in the review process and is scheduled for release in 2011. materials Figure 4.13 reviews attributes of various trail surface materials. The Shunga Trail is largely asphalt-surfaced, but recent projects have used concrete. Asphalt provides an excellent surface when new and is somewhat less expensive than concrete. Concrete provides a more durable, longer-lived surface, particularly in climates like Topekas with freeze-thaw cycles, and can be replaced panel by panel if
necessary. Without prescribing specific regional standards, AASHTO 2010 recommends a six inch minimum depth, including both surface and base courses, over a compacted subgrade. A stable sub-base is especially important to the durability of both materials. This is especially important around drainageways, where stream banks tend to slough off and produce serious cracking and deterioration. Expansion joints on concrete trails should be saw-cut to provide room for movement. trail Width and clearances The accepted minimum width for two-way trails is 10 feet. Eight feet may be adequate for secondary segments in areas with severe right-of-way limits. However, eight feet width does not safely accommodate passing of or by users who require greater width
concrete surfacing. The Shunga Trail extension to 29th Street illustrates Topekas current paving standard.
99
than narrow profile road bicycles, including in-line skaters, bicyclists with child trailers, and recumbents. A two-foot minimum shoulder (3-5 feet is more desirable) with a maximum 6:1 cross-slope should be provided as a recovery zone adjacent to trails. Signs or other traffic control or information devices should be at least two feet from the edge of the trail surface. The bottom edge of any sign should be at least 4 feet from the grade of the trail surface. A soft surfaced two-foot extension to a paved trail can improve conditions for walkers and runners because of its resilience and lower impact. Minimum vertical clearance for trails is 8 feet; 10 feet is recommended unless clearance is limited. When conditions, like the height of a culvert or bottom of a bridge structure, further limits clearance, cyclists must be advised to walk bicycles.
When underpasses require slopes over 5%, consider an alternate accessible route with reduced grades if possible, even if this route requires a grade crossing. Warning signs for trail users should be used on grades approaching 5% and greater. AASHTO 2010 recommends avoiding grades less than 0.5% because of ponding problems.
subsurface and drainage
Typically 4 to 8-inch compacted, smooth, and level. Individual conditions may require special design.

steep underpass on the shunga. These tight, steep and sometimes slippery underpasses on the Shunga Trail pose problems for trail users. Retrofits may include an easing of the grade, lighting, and even mirrors to improve visibility around curves. Mirrors have been used on tight curves on Denvers Cherry Creek Trail.
figure 4.14. railings and trail separations from adjacent slopes
grades and grade changes Most grades on Topekas trail system are relatively easy, but there are some specific problem areas, most notably on some older underpasses on the Shunga Trail and at the south edge of the Lake Shawnee Trail. Recommended maximum grades for multi-use trails are 5% for any distance, 8.3% for distances up to 200 feet, and 10% for distances up to 30 feet (bicycles only). Grades over 5% must include landings and handrails compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Ramps, bridges, and landings adjacent to abrupt grade changes must include 42-inch handrails, designed to meet AASHTO recommendations. Ramp surfaces should be slip-resistant.
Source: AASHTO 2010
Source: AASHTO 2010
100
Trail cross-section should provide adequate cross-drainage and minimize debris deposited by runoff. Typically, this involves a cross slope between 1% and 2%. When trails are adjacent to or cut into a bank, design should catch drainage on the uphill side of the trail to prevent slope erosion and deposits of mud or dirt across the trail.
intersection design Design speed of 20 mph, with horizontal and vertical geometrics and stopping sight distances consistent with AASHTO 2010 standards, as published. In most cases, trail traffic will be subordinate to motor vehicles on intersecting roads. Figure 4.15 illustrates crossing treatments at mid-block intersections. Align or widen trail at railroad intersections to permit perpendicular crossing of tracks.
crosswalk delineation The crossing surface should clearly delineate the trail right-of-way. Trail crossings should be delineated with standard pavement markings, such as the ladder or zebra patterns. Another option is providing a contrasting surface that clearly defines the trail domain. These may include the use of stamped concrete, colored concrete, or pavement marking or patterning products such as StreetPrint or others. At midblock crossings of multi-lane roads, refuge medians should be used to reduce the distance that trail users must negotiate at one time. figure 4.15. intersection conditions for midblock trail/road intersections: yield and stop controlled
Source: AASHTO 2010
101
midblock refuge medians. A crossing median provides refuge to trail users at mid-block crossings, reducing the distance that pedestrians and cyclists are exposed to traffic.
contemporary trail crossing. This crossing of a major arterial includes a refuge median, defined crosswalk, effective warning signage, and the consultants bike.
102
curb cuts and trail access points Avoid the use of bollards or obstacles at grade-level intersections unless operations prove they are needed. If necessary, use entrances with a median separating directional movements in place of bollards. Medians should be placed about 25 feet in from the edge of the roadway to permit space for cyclists to clear the intersection before slowing. When bollards or gateway barriers are used, provide a minimum opening of five feet, adequate to permit adequate clearance for all bicycles. Avoid poorly marked cross barriers that can create hazards for entering bicyclists, particularly in conditions of darkness. At midblock crossings of multi-lane roads, refuge medians should be used to reduce the distance that trail users must negotiate at one time. The bottom of the curb cut should match the gutter grade and have a minimal lip or bump at the seam. Truncated domes should be used to alert visually impaired users to the street crossing. The bottom width of the curb cut should be full width of the intersecting trail.
traffic control Right-of-way should be clearly established. Ordinarily, the trail will be stopped with right-of-way preference given defensively to the motorist. Controls for pedestrian signals should be easily accessible to trail users and should not require cyclists to dismount or move out of their normal path. New crossing technologies such as the hybrid beacon apply well to trail crossings. Topeka is installing such a hybrid signal at the 29th Street crossing of the Landon Trail. Assuming that the pilot installation is successful, this beacon should be used at other busy trail grade crossings.
design for maintenance Provide adequate turning radii and trailhead access to maintenance and emergency vehicles.
information and support facilities Establish a consistent informational sign system that includes a Topeka Bikeways logo, an identifying trail name, trail maps at regular intervals, mileage markers for reference and locating emergency situations, directional signage to destinations, and safety rules and advisories. Provide periodic minor rest stops, including benches, shaded areas, picnic areas, and informational signing. Ensure reasonable access to water, restrooms, and shelter.
signage Provide regulatory and warning signs consistent with the 2009 Edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Standard trail crossings signs, typically a bicycle in a diamond, should always be used to alert motorists of the trail crossing. See Figure 7.3 for suggested sign placement.
hybrid beacon. In 2011, Topeka installed its first hybrid beacon at the 29th Street crossing of the Landon Trail (above). The beacon functions somewhat like school bus warning signals. It is dark when not in use. When actuated by a pedestrian, a flashing and then solid yellow light warns motorists to slow; a solid red light paired with a walk signal stops traffic and gives the rightof-way to the pedestrian. Users report a high degree of motorist compliance and a positive effect on pedestrian safety.
103
infrastructure design applied to the network

Figure 4.16 on the right applies the trail design types to the entire Topeka system, showing the extent of different types of facilities, with the system map reproduced above for reference. The tables and maps in the next chapter detail each individual route and its specific features.
i
system map
Intersections
figure 4.16.
infrastructure types applied to the network
104
figure 4.17.
central topeka detail
figure 4.17.
central topeka detail
105
106
5 | ROUTE DETAILS AND IMPLEMENTATION
CHAPTER
ROuTE DETAILS AND implementation
107
his chapter considers each of the twentyfive potential routes in the proposed topeka bikeways system in detail. it provides guidance on the specific design of each significant segment of each route. finally, it presents methods for staging the system over time.
The detailed presentation of each route includes a strip map that illustrates each street or pathway segment, key destinations along the way, and intersecting bikeway routes. The strip map is similar to maps used to illustrate transit lines, individualizing each line for clarity. The maps are divided into keyed segments, corresponding to key dividing points, milestones, or changes in infrastructure treatment. The number key for each segment corresponds to a row in the accompanying table. The tables display: the endpoints and length of each segment. the nature of the existing facility. Street types reflect the typology discussed in Chapter One. Information also includes number of lanes and width of the street channel, using city records and plat maps, aerial photography, and field measurements. The average daily traffic (ADT) on that specific segment. In most cases, traffic volumes are from counts taken in 2011 and released during October of that year. Data marked by an asterisk (*) are older counts from 2007. short-term options for bikeway development. This presents relatively low-cost ideas for adapting a segment for safer and more comfortable bicycle use, in many cases using techniques such as sharrows that raise motorists awareness of and a greater level of security for cyclists. Short-term options also include other pavement markings such as bike lanes and striped parking lanes, and in some cases minor capital projects that fill short but important gaps or take advantage of opportunities such as planned street reconstruction projects. In many cases, the short-term option is the final state of the facility; in others, it is a useful interim measure that provides real benefits to riders.
Ultimate design. This describes the best final design configuration for the segment. The ultimate design sometimes includes significant lane reconfigurations, alterations in parking patterns, or substantial capital improvements such as widening a street to include paved shoulders. However, in many cases, the ultimate design is simply a refinement or expansion of a short-term option, made more feasible as urban bicycling in Topeka becomes more established and the demand for upgraded facilities increases.
These recommendations should be refined further as individual projects are implemented. However, they provide a starting point for the more detailed design process, and provide guidance in determining priorities and costs of various improvements. After presenting the details of each route, the chapter continues with a capital implementation program that includes: Criteria for determining priorities. Evaluation of segments and routes of the proposed bikeways system based on their relative ease of development. An implementation sequence of the system, assuming full development in 20 to 25 years, with five phases. A pilot bikeway program, the serves all parts of the city with strategic routes and path segments. This program includes statements of probable cost, based on current (late 2011) construction costs.
108
short-term options and ultimate design (8th avenue on route 1, the east-West bikeway). (1) Existing view of 8th Avenue. (2) A short-term option for 8th Avenue, with a 31-foot street width, provides sharrows and bicycle boulevard identification through special signs. (3) An eventual low-capital option consolidates parking on one side. An ultimate design, more feasible when bicycle use of the corridor becomes more established, may be a minor widening to provide bike lanes. This would establish 8th Avenue as a primary bicycle transportation corridor.
Lane modification options (8th Avenue on Route 1, the East-West Bikeway). (1) Existing view of 8th Avenue, a narrow four-lane section permitting on-street parking during off-peak hours. (2) A lane reduction to two travel lanes provides bike lanes and retains parking on one side on an all-day basis. (3) A lane reduction to a three lane section removes parking and provides bike lanes with a center left-turn lane. Reconfiguration options are based on establishing 6th, 10th, and the 12th/Huntoon pair as the primary eastwest routes for motorists, while emphasizing bicycle transportation on 8th.
109
1
1
east-west bikeway
Length (Miles) .47 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 6th Avenue, Deer Creek to Golden
Short Term Options
Ultimate Design
5-lane urban arterial; 62 feet
5,135
Lane modification to 11-foot travel lanes, 10-foot center lane, 4 foot bike lane/shoulders; or Sidewalk modification to one-way sidepaths; or lane modification to 11-foot basic travel lanes with wider outside lanes and sharrows Lane modification with seven foot parking lane on one side, two 11-foot travel lanes, two 5-foot bike lanes Lane modification: eight parking lanes on both sides, two 12-foot travel lanes, two 5-foot bike lanes. Connection to Shunga Trail extension Lane modification: 4-11 foot travel lanes, with 5-foot minimum bike lanes. No parking Five 11-foot travel lanes with two 5-foot bike lanes with no parking; or four 12-foot travel lanes with bike lanes and one-sided parking Lane modification: 10-foot left-turn lane, 10.5 foot travel lanes, 2- 5 foot bike lanes, reversal of diagonal parking to back-in
Same
6th Avenue, Golden to Lamar 6th Avenue, Lamar to Shunga Creek
.42
2-lane transit avenue; 39 feet 2-lane transit avenue; 50 feet
5,885
Same
.60
7,175
Same
6th Avenue, Shunga Creek to Adams 6th Avenue, Adams to Monroe
.24
4-lane urban arterial including railroad viaduct; 54-60 feet 4-lane downtown avenue; 66 feet, including I-70 overpass 5-lane, App 90 feet, with diagonal parking on one or both sides
8,630
Same; consider buffered bike lanes where width is adequate Same
.22
8,630
6th Avenue, Monroe to Van Buren
.32
12,000
Same; reconsider need for diagonal parking on both sides.
110
east-west bikeway
7
3 2 1
1 3
primary route 8 Connecting routes other system links
5 4 3 2
Connecting trails
segment keys
111
1
8
east-west bikeway
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 8th Avenue, Van Buren to Tyler
Short Term Options Lane modification to 10.5 foot travel lanes, and 4-foot bike lanes or lane modification to 10.5 foot inner, wide outer travel lane with sharrows. Convert diagonal parking to back-in; Lane modification with two 11 foot travel lanes with two 5-foot bike lanes; parking on one side,
Ultimate Design Consider lane diet to three lanes with standard bike lanes.
4-lane downtown NA avenue with 14 foot median, some diagonal parking; 60 feet 2-lane urban collector; 31-feet 4-lane civic avenue with landscaped median; 24 feet on either directional channel. 2 lane neighborhood collector; 31 foot 6,000*
8th Avenue, Tyler to Clay 8th Avenue, Clay to Lincoln
.40
Same
10
.15
6,000*
Same Lane modification: two lane divided with 7.5 foot parking lane, 5 foot bike lanes, and 11 foot travel lane on either side of median First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification Enhancement withone-sided parking in striped parking lane. A more aggressive but better facility is a minor widening to bikeway standards to a 40 feet section with one-sided, 8-foot parking lane, 5 foot bike lanes, 11 foot travel lanes Intersection project to realign southbound lanes and provide center crossing median. Precludes southbound to eastbound left turns Same Same as part of complete street improvement of 10th Street.
11
8th Avenue, Lincoln to Summit, Summit to Gage
1.85
2,250
12
Gage Street Intersection
Crossing of 4-lane arterial
19,460 on Gage
Defined crossing with warning signage
13 14
Gage Park 10th Street, Gage Park to Fairlawn
.78 .46
NA 2-lane urban arterial; 25 feet
NA 10,980
10- foot pathway on park perimeter, paralleling Gage and 10th Short-term project to widen 10th to Fairlawn elevated priority of project. Two-way cycle track on north side to near Prairie with hybrid protected crossing. Bike lanes or 1-way cycle tracks to and through the Fairlawn intersection to Belle.
112
1
15
east-west bikeway
Length (Miles) 2 Street Type and Width 2-lane urban arterial; 29-feet ADT (2007) 8,000 Short Term Options None. Route continues south on Belle Avenue bicycle boulevard. Ultimate Design Reconstruction of 10th to complete street standards, with bike lanes. If rural section continues west of Wanamaker, addition of shoulders for bicycle accommodation and road section improvement.
Segment Segment Key 10th, Fairlawn to Urish
12 15 14 13
11
10
1 3
primary route 1 Connecting routes
other system links Connecting trails
segment keys
113
2
1 2
randolph bikeway
Length (Miles) .58 Street Type and Width 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 41 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2011 ADT
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key Randolph, 37th to 33rd
Short Term Options First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. Bicycle boulevard with sharrows, identifcation, and striped parking lanes. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification.
Ultimate Design Same, with one-sided parking in striped parking lane. Enhanced bicycle boulevard with onesided parking and bike lanes. Same, with one-sided parking in striped parking lane.
1,295
Randolph, 33rd to 30th
.29
2,370
Randolph, 30th to 29th
.15
2,370
Brookwood Spur, Randolph to Brookwood Shopping Center Shunga Trail Spur, 29th Street to Shunga Trail
.1
4-lane, 54-60 feet (29th NA Street)
Existing sidewalks from Randolph Ave Sidepath on south side of 29th Street, or trail across creek on alignment of shopping center drive aisle. Same as existing Same
.05
10-foot trail on exclusive ROW, including underpass at 29th NA
NA
Trail Extension, Shunga Trail to SW Randolph at TARC Randolph, TARC to 21st Street Randolph, 21st to 15th
.50
NA
10-foot multi-use trail
Same
.53
2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 31 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet
2,580
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification.
Addition of 10-foot multi-use trail on west side of street, to provide trail continuity from Shunga Trail to 21st. Enhanced bicycle boulevard with onesided parking in striped lane and traffic calming techniques. Enhanced bicycle boulevard with onesided parking in striped lane and traffic calming techniques.
.70
NA
Randolph, 15th to 6th
1.30
NA
114
2
10 11
randolph bikeway
Length (Miles) Street Type and Width Intersection with 5-lane urban arterial .36 2-lane local access; 32 feet 2011 ADT
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 6th Street Intersection at Randolph/Tuffy Kellogg Tuffy Kellogg Drive, 6th Street to Outer Circle Drive
Short Term Options Warning signs with defined crosswalks. Sharrows on existing road.
Ultimate Design Signalization
15,400 on 6th NA
10-foot multi-use path between road and parking lot of Hummer Sports Center.
10
11
2 17
primary route 2 Connecting routes other system links Connecting trails
segment keys
115
3
1
25th street bikeway

Length (Miles) .46 Street Type and Width Park and Hospital Campus parallel to Gage Blvd. 2011 ADT
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key Felker Park/VA, Shunga Trail to 23rd Street Gage Boulevard Crossing 23rd Street, Gage to Morningside Drive
Short Term Options Two-way path parallel to east side of Gage Boulevard
Ultimate Design Same
NA
20,340 on Gage .75 2-lane local; 27-32 feet NA
Warning signs and defined crosswalks Defined crossing with hybrid beacons at 23rd and Gage and refuge median to Seabrook Park, minimum of 100 feet south of 25th. First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification Same
Morningside Drive, 23rd .20 to 25th 25th Street, Morningside to Westport 25th Street, Westport to Urish 1.04
2-lane local; 27 feet
NA
Same
2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 31-32 feet
3,910; 6,255 w. of Belle 2,4803,950
Enhanced bicycle boulevard, adding traffic calming techniques Enhanced bicycle boulevard, adding one-sided parking in striped parking lane, traffic calming techniques
1.36
116
25th street bikeway
3 4 5 6
2 1
2 17
segment keys
117
4
1 2
belle bikeway
Length (Miles) 1.41 Street Type and Width 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2011 ADT
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 28th Street/Belle Avenue, Shunga Trail to 21st Street 21st Street intersection
Short Term Options First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. Sharrows in direct Belle Avenue lane.
Ultimate Design Enhanced bicycle boulevard adding traffic calming techniques. Minor widening to provide bicycle lanes for north-south traffic. Enhanced bicycle boulevard, adding one-sided parking in a striped parking lane and traffic calming techniques. Enhanced bicycle boulevard adding traffic calming techniques. Cycle tracks for non-signalized intersections using cycle tracks (see page ___). Enhanced bicycle boulevard adding traffic calming techniques. Same with complete street improvement of 10th Avenue.
3,175
3-lane, 36 feet with left 2,855 turn pocket .58 2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet Intersection with 5-lane urban arterial; 60 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 29 feet 2-lane, 27 feet, widened to 44 feet at Fairlawn with turn lanes 2-lane, 29 feet 2,855
Belle Avenue, 21st to 17th Street Belle Avenue, 17th to Huntoon Street Huntoon Street intersection at Belle Avenue offset Belle Avenue, Huntoon to 10th Avenue 10th Avenue, Belle to Prairie Road
First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification. First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification. Defined bicycle track through offset with sharrows in curb lane. First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification. Two-way cycle track on north side to near Prairie with hybrid protected crossing. Bike lanes or 1-way cycle tracks to and through the Fairlawn intersection to Belle. Striped cycle track crossing to north side of 10th Street 10- foot pathway on park perimeter, paralleling Gage and 10th, shared with Route 1
.52
2,205
.03
12,000 on Huntoon NA
.53
.34
8,72510,980
10th Avenue, Prairie Road intersection Mt. Calvary Cemetery/ Gage Park, Prairie to 6th
10,980
Complete street conversion of 10th Avenue with bicycle lanes Same; monitoring of use for separate pedestrian/bicycle tracks
NA
NA
118
4
10
belle bikeway
Length (Miles) Street Type and Width 5-lane multi-use arterial; 60 feet with left turn pocket .22 5-lane multi-use arterial; 60 feet 2011 ADT
(* 2007) 19,460 on Gage s. of 6th; 5,850 on 6th
Segment Segment Key Gage Boulevard, 6th Avenue intersection Gage Boulevard, 6th Avenue to Hayden High
Short Term Options Defined sidepath crossing on west side of Gage Boulevard
Sidepath on west side to Hayden High entrance. Other options include connection through Gage Ct., or easement through Chalet Apartments
11
14,680
Same
2 4 1 5 6 7 3 8 4 5 6
9 7 8
10
11
2 5
9 10 11
segment keys
119
5
1 2
oakland-potwin bikeway
Length (Miles) .40 Street Type and Width 2-lane rural collector; 25 feet 2-lane, rural collector; 25 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 25 feet 2-lane continuous local; 27feet Existing trail 2011 ADT Short Term Options
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key Rice Road, Shunga Creek to Seward Ave Seward Ave, Rice Rd. to Strait Avenue Strait Avenue, Seward to Thomas Avenue Thomas Avenue, Strait to Oakland Park Oakland Park Trail, Poplar Street to River Road River Road/Adams Street, Oakland Park to 1st Avenue 1st Avenue, Adams to Kansas Avenue
Ultimate Design Connection to Shunga Trail extension on north creek levee from Golden to Rice; bicycle shoulders with trail extension. Bicycle shoulders or 2-way cycle track on north side of street 10-foot, 2-way cycle track on west edge of Billard Airport Same
575*
Sharrows
.50
4,110
Sharrows
.75
2,130
Sharrows
.63
NA
Sharrows
.57
NA
Existing trail
Same
2-lane collector; 25 feet; 50 feet on Adams Street segment 4-lane downtown avenue; dual street channel with 94-foot total width; 37 foot median with disused rail 2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 26 feet
4,960
Sharrows
Paved shoulders to improve street section and accommodate bicycles safely; bike lanes on Adams Street segment. Future connection to north Levee Trail by reuse of former railroad bridge of River Road. Same, with promenade in current median as part of a riverfront development program. With promenade development, bike lanes may be shifted to the left side of each channel, adjacent to the median. Final configuration partially dependent on design of Polk-Quincy viaduct. Same; a path connecting Kansas and Taylor must be integrated into final design of the Polk-Quincy viaduct project Same
.32
1,470
Single directional bicycle lanes on both channels
1st Avenue, Kansas Avenue to Taylor 1st Avenue, Taylor to Quinton
.57
2,835
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification.
.41
980
120
5 11
4 3
10
9 8 7
6 2 1
2 9
segment keys
121
5
10 11
Length (Miles) .62 Street Type and Width 2-lane neighborhood collector; 31 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2-lane urban arterial; 32 feet 2011 ADT Short Term Options
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 1st Avenue, Quinton to The Drive The Drive/1st Avenue, 1st Avenue to MacVicar MacVicar, 1st Avenue to East Circle Drive
980
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. Sharrows
.54
1,485 on 1st e. of MacVicar
Same
12
.1
12,205
Reconfiguration with icycle lanes with no parking; otherwise twoway cycle track on west (campus) side
Same
13
East Circle and Center Building Drive, MacVicar to Oakley Oakley Avenue, West Drive to 4th Street 4th Street, Oakley to Frazier Avenue Frazier Avenue, 4th to 6th Street 6th Street, Frazier to Gage Blvd. 6th Street, Gage to Westchester
.58
2-lane local circulation road; 25 feet
NA
Sharrows on East Circle and Center Addition of paths along and connecting East Building Drive through Hummer and West Circle Drives to Oakley Sports Center; paths around ballfields to Oakley Sharrows Same
14
.13
2-lane continuous local; 32 feet 2-lane local; 27 feet
NA
15
.21
NA
Sharrows
Same
16
.22
NA
Sharrows
Path along ponds through Family Services campus and along 6th Street frontage of cemetery to 6th and Gage. Same; long-term path in segment 16 satisfies same function. Future complete street conversion of 6th Street with bicycle lanes
17
.28
5-lane; 60 feet
15,005
Two-way cycle track segment on north side Two-way cycle track on north side of Gage Park as part of circumferential path
18
.53
2-lane urban arterial; 25 feet
5,850
122
21 16 24 23 22 19 20 18 17
14 15
13
12
2 9
segment keys
123
5
19
Length (Miles) .46 Street Type and Width 2-lane urban arterial; 25 to 29 feet 2011 ADT Short Term Options
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 6th Street, Westchester to Fairlawn
Ultimate Design Complete street conversion with bicycle lanes
4,060
Continuation west on existing street is only suitable for experienced cyclists with Share the Road signage. Short-term bikeway route uses Westchester and Cedar Crest branches Sharrows, connecting to Bikeway Route 4 at 10th Avenue Defined crossing of 6th Avenue with caution signs; sharrows Share the Road signage without biukeway designation Sharrows
20
Westchester Branch: .50 Westchester, 6th to 10th Avenue Cedar Crest Branch: Westchester/Danbury/ Cedar Crest 6th Street, Fairlawn to Wanamaker 6th Street Wanamaker to Kansas History Center Kansas History Center to Urish .58
2-lane; 27 feet
440
Same
21
2-lane, 27 feet
NA
Same
22
1.01
2-lane, 25-29 feet
NA
Complete street conversion with bicycle lanes Widening with bicycle lanes
23
.82
3-lane, 40 feet to Alfrey NA Road; 2-lane, 25 feet to History Center parking lot NA NA
24
.30
Existing unpaved service road or existing paths
10-foot path to Urish Road gate, connecting to Route 6. Possible future segment to north with ultimate development of trail on south side of Kansas River (T8)
124
median promenade and bike lanes, commonwealth avenue in boston
riverfront bikeway opportunities. Top: Disused railroad in the 1st Avenue median could become a promenade as a catalyst for surrounding development. Bike lanes would flank the center greensward. Above right: The unused railroad bridge and River Road. Right: Approach path from River Road to the bridge level. The bridge could eventually connect with a Levee Trail on the north side of the Kansas River, and provide a safer substitute for the Kansas/ Quincy Bridge.
125
6
1
southwest loop bikeway

Length (Miles) .46 Street Type and Width 2-lane local; 25 feet 2011 ADT
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key Terra Drive, Landon Trail to Topeka Blvd. via frontage road 49th Street, Topeka Blvd. to Gage Blvd. Gage Blvd, 49th to 53rd
Short Term Options Sharrows with connection to Landon Trail None Share the road signage
NA
2 3
2.27 .50
2-lane unpaved future arterial; 25 feet 2-lane rural arterial; 25 feet travel surface with shoulders 2-lane rural arterial; 27 feet 3 to 5-lane arterial on city edge; 38-60 feet 2-lane future neighborhood collector 2-lane continuous local; 27 feet 2-lane, rural section neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2-lane, 27 feet, with roundabouts at some intersections
NA 1,800
Bicycle lanes or shoulders with eventual paving of street. Bicycle lanes or shoulders
53rd Street, Gage Blvd. to Wanamaker Road Wanamaker Road, 53rd to 47th Street (future) 47th Street (future), Wanamaker to Lincolnshire Lincolnshire, 47th to 37th; street is currently developed to about 46th. 37th, Lincolnshire to Nottingham Nottingham, 37th to Urish Road Urish Road, Nottingham to 6th Street
1.76
2,110
Share the Road signage without bikeway designation Share the Road signage without bikeway designation Continue route along Wanamaker to 41st, and along 41st to Lincolnshire Sharrows north of 41st
Bicycle lanes or shoulders if rural section remains Sidepath
.74
7,195 at 41st St. NA
.60
Sharrows or bike lanes on 47th
1.16
NA
Sharrows
.12
NA
Share the road signage between Wanamaker and Nottingham Sharrows
Minor widening to add shoulders to accommodate bicycles and motorist safety Minor widening to add shoulders to accommodate bicycles and motorist safety Improvement to complete street standards, with bicycle lanes included in widening.
.70
5,550
10
3.42
7,68010,465
None
126
southwest loop bikeway
10
8 7 6 5 4 3
2 9
2 1
segment keys
127
7
1
15th street bikeway

Length (Miles) .62 Street Type and Width 5-lane urban arterial; 62 feet 2011 ADT
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 6th Avenue, Deer Creek to 10th Street divergence
Short Term Options Lane modification to 11-foot travel lanes, 10-foot center lane, 4 foot bike lane/shoulders; or Sidewalk modification to one-way sidepaths; or lane modification to 11-foot basic travel lanes with wider outside lanes and sharrows. Striped parking lane on single parking side, sharrows New bridge in design. Two-way cycle track on south side to connect Shunga Trail segments; WB bike lane on north side Lane modification to 11-foot travel lanes, parking on one side, and 5-foot bicycle lanes. Lane reduction from 5 to 3 lanes with bicycle lanes on 10th to 11th block; sharrows to 13th with caution signage at 12th Street intersection.
5,1358,830
2 3
10th Street, 6th Avenue to Shunga Trail Bridge 10th Street Bridge over Shunga Creek
1.09 .1
2-lane neighborhood collector; 31 feet 5-lane, 70 feet
3,570 3,570
Same Same
10th Street, Shunga Trail to Quincy Street Quincy Street, 10th to 13th Street
.40
4 to 5-lane, 60-70 feet
4,000* 10,370 w. of Quincy
Same
.51
5-lane, 76 feet from 10th to 11th; 2-lane, 31 feet from 11th to 13th.
NA
Minor widening for bicycle lanes on 11th to 13th segment.
13th Street, Quincy to Jackson 13th Street, Jackson to Clay Clay, 13th to 15th (Coincident with Bikeway Route 8)
.08
2-lane, 31 feet
NA
Single-side parking in striped lane; Same direction through intersection jog at Jackson using chevrons Sharrows Single-side parking in striped lane with sharrows Enhanced bicycle boulevard with sharrows, one-sided parking with striped parking lane, and additional traffic calming techniques. Path through Central Park to align with Clay north of 13th.
.73
2-lane local; 30-31 feet
Under 1,000* NA
.17
2-lane neighborhood collector, 30 feet
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identifying signs. Motorist advisory signage at intersections with 12th and Huntoon
128
15th street bikeway
7 14 13 12 11 11 10 9 8
2 9
segment keys
129
7
9
15th street bikeway

Length (Miles) Street Type and Width 2011 ADT Short Term Options
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 15th/Robinson Middle School
Ultimate Design Sharrows on 15th Street, with path adjacent to tennis courts leading to 15th and Lincoln
School campus
NA
Sharrows on 14th, Lincoln, and 15th around school campus.
10
15th Street, Lincoln to McAlister
1.96
2-lane continuous local; 30-31 feet
NA
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification.
Enhanced bicycle boulevard with traffic calming techniques at key locations, and single-sided parking in striped parking lane. Same
11
McAlister, 15th to 17th
.31
2-lane neighborhood collector, 27 feet 3-lane urban arterial; 32 feet 4-lane, 49 feet
NA
Sharrows
12
17th Street/Mt. Hope Cemetery to 15th and Fairlawn 15th and Fairlawn Intersection 15th, Fairlawn to Belle Avenue
.92
9,670
Share the road signage without bikeway designation. Short-term Route 7 ends t 17th and McAlister None.
Two-way cycle track on south and west sides of cemetery to 15th and Fairlawn. Minor street realignment to provide pedestrian refuge median; warning signage or beacons. Same
13
14,500 on Fairlawn NA
14
.21
Sharrows
130
15th street bikeway
7 14 13 12 11 10 9 8
2 9
segment keys
131
8
1 2 3
Clay/25th street bikeway

Length (Miles) .74 1.32 .95 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT
(* 2007)
Segment Segment Key 25th, Dornwood Park to California 25th, California to Landon Trail 25th/27th, Landon Trail to Buchanan Street Buchanan, 27th-21st
Short Term Options
Ultimate Design
2-lane neighborhood collector, 41 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector, 27-37 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector, 27-30 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27-31 feet with speed humps
NA 1,580 1,275
Lane modification to 11 foot travel lanes, parking on one side, bike lanes Sharrows Sharrows
Same Sharrows with one-sided parking with striped parking lane. One-way EB cycle track on south side along Armory and Country Club sites. Minor widening for WB bike lane. Enhanced bicycle boulevard with sharrows, one-sided parking with striped parking lane, and additional traffic calming techniques. New access to Shunga Trail.
.51
NA
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identifying signs. Signalized intersection at 21st Street. Signs directing cyclists to Shunga Trail. Chevrons to define path across 21st Street. Sharrows First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identifying signs. Motorist advisory signage at intersections with 12th and Huntoon First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identifying signs.
5 6
Buchanan/Hampton, 21st to Clay Clay, 21st to Huntoon
.07 1.06
2-lane local, 27 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 31 feet
NA NA
Same Enhanced bicycle boulevard with sharrows, one-sided parking with striped parking lane, and additional traffic calming techniques. Path through Central Park to align with Clay north of 13th. Enhanced bicycle boulevard with sharrows, one-sided parking with striped parking lane, and additional traffic calming techniques.
Clay, Huntoon to Old Prairie Town
1.43
2-lane neighborhood collector; 31 feet
NA
132
Clay/25th street bikeway
8 3
5 4 3 2 1 1
Connecting trails segment keys
133
9
1 2
washburn bikeway
Length (Miles)
.32 .08
Segment Segment Key

Broadmoor, 1st to 4th 4th Avenue, Washburn to Lane
Street Type and Width
2011 ADT
(* 2007)) NA 3,435
Short Term Options
Ultimate Design
2-lane local, 27-29 feet 2-lane one-way pair, 31 feet
Sharrows Chevron pavement marking to guide from SB Broadmoor to SB Washburn on left side of street (facing west). WB bike lane on right side. Striped parking lane. Sharrows in right SB lane, bike lane where width permits. Minimum width with bike lane of 27 feet without parking, 34 feet with parking. Striped parking lane. Sharrows in right SB lane, bike lane where width permits. Minimum width with bike lane of 27 feet without parking, 34 feet with parking. Striped parking lane. Sharrows on both curb lanes with chevron guidance to campus paths. Striped parking lane. Sidepath along west side of Washburn Avenue, created by widening existing path or building a new path. Sharrows on internal campus streets
Same Same
Washburn SB, 4th to Lane/ Washburn divergence
1.51
2-lane one-way pair with varying parking configuration and width between 27 and 32 feet. 2-lane one-way pair with varying parking configuration and width between 27 and 32 feet. 4-lane mixed-use arterial, 49 feet + left turn at 17th Washburn Avenue on east edge of campus. Internal campus streets
4,4157,280
Same
Lane NB, Lane/Washburn divergence to 4th
1.53
5,4107,510
Same. One-way cycle track is possible in landscaped area on east side of Lane, merging into street at 16th Street.
Washburn, 17th to Washburn/Lane divergence Washburn University Pathway, 17th to Durow Road Durow Road/ Jewell Ave/19th Street, Washburn to Macvicar 19th, Macvicar to Hope
.02
15,900 at 21st NA
Same
.34
Same
.60
NA
Same
1.50
2-lane, continuous local, 27 feet 2-lane, local, 27 feet
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identifying signs. Defined crossing of Gage Blvd. Sharrows on Hope, 18th, Sims
Enhanced bicycle boulevard with sharrows, one-sided parking with striped parking lane, and additional traffic calming techniques. Same, Protected crossing of 17th Street to Mount Hope cycle track.
19th-Hope to 17th at Mount Hope Cemetery
.24
134
washburn bikeway
1 2
3 4
5 9 6 8 7
9 22
segment keys
135
10
Segment Key
1

Segment Length (Miles)
3.68
2011 ADT
(* 2007)) 3,3859,210
Short Term Options
Ultimate Design
Wanamaker Road, 61st to 37th
3-lane arterial between 50th and 61st, 38 feet; 5-lane arterial between 37th and 50th, 60 feet. Roundabouts at major intersections. 2-lane rural section, 27 feet.
None
Upgrade of existing or planned sidewalks to sidepath standards.
Wanamaker Road, 37th to 31st Terrace
9,30011,490
Programmed construction project will include sidepath with defined crossings at key intersections (34th Terrace, 31st Terrace) Sharrows Street crossing as a pedestrian, curb lane use for experienced cyclists Sharrows, with one-sided parking in striped parking lane Use of sidewalk on south side to alignment with signalized intersection leg Sharrows, with one-sided parking in striped parking lane None Sharrows First stage bicycle boulevard, with sharrows and identification (Coincident with Route 3) Bike lanes with one-sided parking
Same
10E
2E 3E
31st Terrace/Wanamaker Drive to 29th Street Wanamaker Drive/Westport Drive transition at 29th Westport Drive, 29th to 21st Westport Drive jog at 21st Street Westport Drive, 21st to 17th 31st Terrace to Villa West Villa West, south terminus to 25th 25th, Villa West to Kingsrow
.54 .05
2-lane neighborhood collector; 31 feet Offset intersection without signals 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet Offset intersection with signals 2-lane neighborhood collector; 29-39 feet Creek 2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 31-32 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 40 feet
NA NA
Same Major street intersection design without signalization, using chevron guidance and oneway cycle tracks (see page __) Same Major street intersection design with signalization, using chevron guidance and twoway cycle track (see page __) Same Multi-use trail along Shunga Creek tributary to foot of Villa West Drive Sharrows, with one-sided parking in striped parking lane Enhanced bicycle boulevard, adding one-sided parking in striped parking lane, traffic calming techniques Same
4E 5E
1.02 .05
1,7255,300 23,320 on 21st St. NA NA NA 2,480
6E
.53 .35 .65 .26
10W 2W
3W 4W
5W
Kingsrow, 25th to 21st
.70
1,020
136
10
Segment Key 6W

Segment Length (Miles)
.40
2011 ADT
(* 2007)) 11,000
Short Term Options
Ultimate Design
21st Street, Kingsrow to Mall entrance
2- to 5-lane major arterial
Two-way sidepath on north side of street
Same
5w 4w 3w 2w 1 2 2e 3e 4e 6w
7w
8w
9w 5e 6e
10 3
segment keys
137
10
Segment Key

Segment Length (Miles) .50 .39 .58 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT
(* 2007))
Figure 7.1: trail surface comparisons

Short Term Options Ultimate Design
10W
7W 8W 9W
Kingsrow, 21st to 17th 17th, Arvonia to Urish 17th, Arvonia to Arrowhead
No existing street No existing street west of Mall 3-lane multi-use arterial, widening to 5 lanes at Wanamaker intersection No street between 17th and Drury; 2-lane local, Drury to Huntoon; 29 feet NA
NA NA 8,480
None None without street extension Sharrows in curb lane. Reconfiguration to provide bike lanes or advisory lanes on I-470 bridge. New street segment with sharrows; sharrows in existing street; one-sided parking in striped parking lane Ashworth Place from Arrowhead to Huntoon; negotiated easement using continuation of Ashworth through Home Depot Center to Wanamaker; widened sidewalk on east side of Wanamaker to 11th Street; 11th to Robinson. Sharrows None
Bike lanes with two-way sidepath when street is developed Bike lanes from Arvonia to Urish with development of street. Minor widening to include bike lanes
10
Arrowhead, 17th to Huntoon
.52
NA
Same
11
Creek path, Huntoon to Robinson
.33
NA
Path east of commercial center along drainageway; defined crossing of Huntoon
12 13
Robinson Avenue, path terminus to 10th 10th, Robinson to Wanamaker Wanamaker, 10th to 6th
.27 .15
2-lane local; 27-29 feet 2-lane obsolete rural section arterial; 26 feet 4-lane divided multiuse arterial; 60 feet with median
NA 10,980
Same Complete street with bike lanes or oneway cycle tracks; combined route with Route 1 NB: Existing shoulder with protected perpendicular crossing at EB I-70 ramps. Bike lane over bridge with elimination of unnecessary center left turn lane. SB: Combination of one-way cycle track with SB bike lane with elimination of center left turn lane on overpass.
14
.39
7,76021,735 n. of Huntoon
Sharrows in curb lane; cautionary for experienced cyclists only
138
10
7w
8w
9w 10 11
13 12
14
10 3
segment keys
139
11
1
lake to landon bikeway

Length (Miles) 1 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT
(* 2007))

Segment Segment Key 41st Street, Lake Shawnee to California Short Term Options Ultimate Design
2-lane neighborhood collector, rural section; 20 feet
NA
Sharrows
Widening of street to standard dimensions with bicycle shoulders
2 3
California Avenue, 41st to 42nd 42nd Street, California to Adams Adams, 42nd to 37th Adams, 37th to 35th
.11 1.01
2-lane rural section arterial, 21 feet 2-lane continuous local; 30-41 feet 2-lane rural section arterial, 22 feet 4-lane urban arterial, 49 feet + left turn lane at 37th 2-lane continuous local, 27 feet Park pathway and pedestrian bridge 2-lane local cul-de-sac
3,900 NA
Two-way sidepath on east side with defined crossing to 42nd Street. Sharrows with path connection between two street ends west of Illinois Avenue Minor widening with bicycle shoulders Sharrows on both curb lanes
Same Same
4 5
.58 .23
6,035 8,300
Street widening to standard dimensions with bicycle shoulders or lanes One-way cycle tracks or minor widening for bike lanes, continuing proposed bike lanes south of 37th Same
35th Street/Irvingham, Adams to Betty Phillips Park Betty Phillips Park to Humboldt St Humboldt St, Pedestrian bridge to 37th Street 37th Street, Humboldt to Landon Trail
.56
NA
Sharrows. Sharrows on Irvingham continue to Betty Phillips Park. Existing with completion of bridge to Humboldt St cul-de-sac Sharrows
7 8
.44 .13
NA NA
Same; possible widening of park path depending on demand Same
.07
3-lane urban arterial, 36 feet
NA
10-foot sidepath on north side of street
Same
140
11
10 11
lake to landon bikeway

Length (Miles) .79 Street Type and Width 2-lane, continuous local, 25-32 feet 2-lane, local, 27-30 feet ADT (2007) NA Short Term Options Sharrows Ultimate Design Same

Segment Segment Key Fremont/Cunningham, Irvingham to 29th Street 29th Street, Cunningham to Landon Trail
1.81
510
Sidepath on south side of street.
Same.
11
10 7 6 9 8 5
11 17
4 2 1 1
Connecting trails segment keys
141
12
1
edgewater bikeway
Length (Miles) Street Type and Width 2011 ADT
(* 2007))

Segment Segment Key Connector Path, 37thRandolph to Oak Parkway Oak Parkway, 37th to Twilight Drive Twilight Drive, Oak Pkwy to Gage Blvd. Gage Blvd, Twilight Dr. to 30th St. 30th, Burnett, 29th Terrace, and Indian Trail, Gage Blvd. to 29th St. Indian Trail, 29th St intersection .15 1.08 .04 Short Term Options Ultimate Design
2-lane urban arterial (37th Street); 27 feet
8,655
Two-way sidepath on north side of Same 37th Street, with crossing at Oak Pkwy. with continuation to path along creek under I-470 Sharrows Sharrows Crosswalks across Gage and sidewalk use (walking) on west side of Gage Blvd. Sharrows Same Same Enhanced crosswalk with 2-way cycle track to negotiate intersection jog between Twilight and 30th Street. Same
2 3 4
2-lane neighborhood parkway; 27 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 5-lane multi-use arterial, 62 feet 2-lane local streets, 27-32 feet
NA NA 17,930
.45
NA
Intersection with 5-lane multi-use arterial
Existing crosswalks with additional warning signs
Enhanced intersection including pedestrian refuge median. Possible diversion with median of left-turning traffic to adjacent streets, primarily Eveningside to the west Same
7 8
Indian Trail, 29th to Shunga Trail access Shunga Trail access via Indian Trail bridge over creek Edgewater/ Morningside, Shunga Drive to 21st
.21 .07
2-lane local, 32 feet Existing path and bridge
NA NA
Sharrows
Chevron guidance to direct cyclists Path east of parking lot from Shunga Trail to bridge; route continues to and to Shunga Drive. through Crestview Community Center parking lot to Shunga Drive. Sharrows Same. Improved intersection at Morningside and Edgewater with a possible roundabout or improved geometry.
.75
2-lane neighborhood parkway; 30 feet
NA
142
12
12
edgewater bikeway
Segment Segment Key 10 Morningside, 21st Street intersection Length (Miles) Street Type and Width 2011 ADT Short Term Options Ultimate Design Major street intersection design without signalization, using chevron guidance and one-way cycle tracks. Same. Possible transitional path through Sims Park to link street offset around open space.
11 10 9 8 7 6
11
Intersection 21,000 Crosswalks with multiwith use arterial; improved 44 feet warning signage; chevron directionals to Sims Avenue .53 2-lane local; NA 29 feet Sharrows
Sims Avenue, 21st to 17th
5 4 3
12 17
1,2
segment keys
143
13
1
huntoon bikeway
(* 2007))

Segment Segment Key 12th, Monroe to Harrison Short Term Options Ultimate Design
2-lane at Monroe, widening to 4-lane divided downtown multi-lane 2-lane WB member of one-way pair; 35 feet
8,000*
Sharrows in curb lane
Same or minor widening for bike lanes. Possible street conversion to two 10-foot, low speed travel lanes and a 4-foot bike lane in each direction. Same
2W
12th, Harrison to Western
.37
3,640
Sharrows with striped parking lane on one (north) side); where space permits, lane width reduction to 10.511 feet with 5-foot right-side bike lane.
Options: 1) Peak hour travel/off-peak parking lane on left curb lane, bike lane on right side. 2) Right-side joint bike/parking lane, with shared territory defined by pavement marking
3W
12th, Western to Gage Blvd.
2-lane WB member of one-way pair; 27 feet. Off-peak parking permitted in right lane 2-lane WB member of one-way pair; turnoff to 2-lane local; 25-32 feet 2-lane local; 25 feet
4,9705,685
Same
4W
12th, Gage to McAlister
.31
4,925
Sharrows directing cyclists to 12th Street from 12th/Huntoon convergence, with sharrows continuing on 12th. Sharrows Sharrows in right lane
Same
5W 2E
McAlister, Gage to Huntoon Huntoon, McAlister to Gage .30
NA
Same One-way EB cycle track, transitioning to bike lane at Gage intersection
3-lane urban arterial, 9.775 transitioning to 2-lane, EB member of one-way pair 2-lane EB member of one-way pair; 35 feet. Off-peak parking permitted in right lane 2-lane EB member of one-way pair; 30 feet. 5,3755,660
3E
Huntoon, Gage to Western
1.99
Options: 1) Peak hour travel/off-peak parking lane on left curb lane, bike lane on right side. 2) Right-side joint bike/parking lane, with shared territory defined by pavement marking
Same; convert diagonal parking against bike lane to back-in configuration
4E
Huntoon, Western to Harrison
.35
NA
Sharrows
Right-side bike lane with no on-street parking
144
13
6
huntoon bikeway
(* 2007))

Segment Segment Key Huntoon, McAlister to Fairlawn Short Term Options Ultimate Design
4 to 5-lane urban arterial; 50-60 feet
12,850
Use of existing sidewalks and/or sharrows on curb lanes. Sidewalk use is feasible because of limited interruptions and pedestrian traffic. Restriping to provide bike lanes while retaining five-lane section.
One-way cycle tracks, resolving into bike lanes at Fairlawn intersection.
Huntoon, Fairlawn to Wanamaker
1.00
5-lane urban arterial; 60 to 62 feet
10,99514,570
Same
5w
4w 2e
3w 3e
2w 4e
13 17
segment keys
145
14
Golden bikeway

Segment Segment Key 1 25th, Dornwood Park to Highland Ave Length (Miles) .21 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT
(* 2007))
Short Term Options
Ultimate Design
NA
Lane modification to 11 foot travel lanes, parking on one side, bike lanes
Same
Highland Ave, 25th to 21st 21st Street, Highland to Golden Golden, 21st to I-70
.50
2-lane rural section neighborhood collector; 25 feet 2-lane rural section arterial; 25 feet. 2-lane rural section neighborhood collector; 22 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; typical 41 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 31-32 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27-31 feet
1,045
Sharrows
Bike shoulders on rural section road
.12
3,600*
Sharrows
Bike shoulders on rural section road; bike lanes incorporated into any street reconstruction Bike shoulders on rural section road; bike lanes incorporated into any street reconstruction Bike lanes with consolidation of on-street parking to one side Same Same Same, with traffic calming enhancements
.32
1,995
Sharrows
Golden, I-70 to 6th Avenue Golden, 6th Avenue to Shunga Trail Golden, Shunga Trail to Seward Avenue Chester, Seward to Riverside RV Park
.68
2,0753,020 3,810 6,540 2,2753,095
Sharrows with striped parking lanes
6 7 8
.61 .42 1.42
Sharrows, with ramp and direction to Shunga Trail Sharrows with sidepath on west side of street First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification
146
14
Golden bikeway
14 17
segment keys
147
15
1
4th avenue bikeway

(* 2007))
Segment Segment Key Golden, Shunga/ Deer Creek Trail to 4th Avenue. 4th Avenue, Golden to Branner
Short Term Options
Ultimate Design
2-lane neighborhood collector; 31-32 feet
2,250*
Sharrows, with ramp and direction to Same Shunga Trail; coincident with Route 14
.89
2-lane neighborhood collector; 32-38 feet
1,610
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows; alternative is bike lanes with parking permitted. Upgraded bridge at Market Street between Scott Magnet School and Shunga Trail. Bike lanes with parking on one side; upgrade paving surface at railroad crossing Reduced lane width or number of lanes to add bike lanes in both directions. Convert right side lane to bike lane Maintain two 11-foot travel lanes with WB bike lane and existing parking
Same
4th Avenue, Branner to Madison 4th Avenue, Madison to Kansas 4th Avenue, Kansas to Topeka Blvd. 4th Avenue, Topeka Blvd. to Western 4th Avenue/Willow Avenue, Western to 5th Avenue convergence 5th Avenue, 4th Avenue divergence to Topeka Blvd.
.45
2-lane collector; 38 feet 5-lane downtown multi-lane with twosided parking; 76 feet 3-lane downtown oneway; 41-48 feet 2-lane WB member of one-way pair; 41 feet 2-lane WB member of one-way pair; 31 feet 2-lane EB member of one-way pair; 31 feet
3,070
Same
.24
6,030
Same
5W 6W 7W
.32 .32 .5
3,474* 3,120 3,435
Same Same
WB sharrows with parking on one side Same in striped parking lane EB sharrows with parking on one side in striped parking lane Same
5E
.83
2,4503,290
148
15
6E
4th avenue bikeway

(* 2007))
Segment Segment Key 5th Avenue/Qunicy Street, Topeka Blvd to 4th Ave Willow Avenue, Convergence to Willow Park/College Avenue
Short Term Options
Ultimate Design
2 to 3-lane EB member of one-way pair; 48-54 feet.
2,955
Lane reconfiguration with 11-foot travel lanes, EB bike lane, and twosided parking; sharrows on 5th and Quncy east of Kansas. Bike lanes on both sides to park. Existing parking permitted but likely to be infrequent.
Same
.3
2-lane collector; 31 feet 3,435
Ultimate removal of on-street parking from this segment.
7W 5E 6W 5W 6E 4 3 2 1
15 21
segment keys
149
16
1
Clarion woods bikeway

(* 2007))

Segment Segment Key Clarion Woods Park, Elevation Parkway to 37th Street 37th Street, Fairlawn to Chelsea YMCA site and drainage corridor, 37-Chelsea to 35-Belle Short Term Options Ultimate Design
Informal path on Fairlawn alignment
NA
None
Multi-use trail to connect to future Elevation Parkway
.11
3-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet NA
5,670
None
Two-way cycle track to Clarion Woods Park entrance along south side of street. Mid-block crossing of 37th Street, using refuge median Multi-use trail along edge of YMCA and Covenant Baptist sites, linking into path system of retention and wetlands structures east of Belle Avenue. Final alignment to be developed with participating organizations Sharrows Complete street, probably a five-lane section with bike lanes or one-way cycle tracks, resolving to bike lanes at major intersections. Crossing at 34th Terrace intersection to accommodate Route 16. Sharrows
.41
NA
None
4 5
35th Street, Belle to Wanamaker Wanamaker, 35th to 34th Terrace
.49 .09
2-lane continuous local, 26-32 feet 2-lane obsolete rural section arterial; 27 feet
NA 9,300
None None
34th Terrace, Wanamaker to end of street Sherwood Wastewater Plant and Farley School site to Fountaindale and Nottingham Fountaindale, Nottingham to 33rd 33rd, Fountaindale to Indian Hills Road
.35
NA
None
.67
Open space and public property
NA
None
Multi-use trail across Shunga Creek and around the edge of Sherwood wastewater plant and Farley School sites. Connection to Route 6 at Urish Road
8 9
.91 .13
2-lane continuous local; 25 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 25 feet
NA 1,000
Sharrows Sharrows
Same Same
150
16
Clarion woods bikeway
9 8
6 5 4 3 2 1
16 6
segment keys
151
17
1
33rd street bikeway

Length (Miles) .91 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT 2,955* Short Term Options Ultimate Design
Segment Segment Key 37th Street, West Edge to California
Lane definition, with 12 foot travel lanes and bike lanes.
Same
37th Street, California to Indiana
.50
3-lane neighborhood arterial; 36 feet
3,820
Sharrows
Minor widening to add bike lanes. A lane reconfiguration to 10 foot travel lanes and 11 foot center left-turn lane and reduce scope of widening to a single side. Same Same
3 4
Indiana Avenue, 37th to 35th Terrace 35th Terrace/35th Street, Indiana to Adams 35th Street/Irvingham Street, Adams to Betty Phillips Park Betty Phillips Park to Landon Trail
.23 .55
2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet 2-lane continuous local; 32 feet 2-lane continuous local; 27 feet Park path, 2-lane local cul-de-sac (Humboldt St), and 3-lane urban arterial (37th St) Existing trail to 33rd Street trailhead 2-lane local; 32 feet 2-lane local; 30 feet
3,110 NA
Sharrows Sharrows
.54
NA
Sharrows
Same
.64
NA
Existing path through Betty Phillips Park; pedestrian bridge to Humboldt St; sharrows on Humboldt; sidepath on north side of 37th St to trail; Coincident with Route 11 None Sharrows Sharrows
Conversion to three lanes with bike lanes east of Brendan; bike lanes with one-sided parking west
Same
7 8 9
10
Landon Trail, 37th to 33rd Street 33rd Street, Landon Trail to Van Buren
.48 .13
NA NA NA
Further development of trailhead Same Same

Same
Van Buren, 33rd to Croix .18

Croix Street, Van Buren to Westview .67
3 to 4-lane collector, 48 2,500 feet east of Brendan; 2-lane collector, 41 feet west of Brendan
152
17
11 12 13 14 15
33rd street bikeway

Length (Miles) .16 .17 .10 1.29 .07 Street Type and Width 2-lane neighborhood collector, 32 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector, 30-36 feet 4-lane urban arterial, 48 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet 2-lane local; 27 feet
Segment Segment Key Westview, Croix to Clontarf Clontarf, Westview to Burlingame Burlingame, Clontarf to 33rd Street 33rd Street, Burlingame to Arnold Arnold Street, 33rd Street to Twilight Drive
2011 ADT
NA NA
Short Term Options Sharrows Sharrows with crossing at signalized intersection at Burlingame
Ultimate Design Same Same; possible pathway alternative through Avondale School site Same Same Same; connection to Route 12
12,700 Sidepath for short segment on west side of street 2,760 NA Sharrows Sharrows
15
14
13 12
11 10
9 8
van buren st
5 6
17 2
segment keys
153
18
1
hillcrest bikeway
Length (Miles) .25 Street Type and Width 2-lane local; 22 feet rural section 2011 ADT NA Short Term Options Sharrows Ultimate Design Bike shoulders. Alternative of a crossing to Eisenhower Middle School/Highland Park elementary, with multi-use path through the school site to the north boundary at Minnesota Avenue. Enhanced bicycle boulevard with minor widening to add bicycle shoulders to rural section. Enhanced bicycle boulevard with minor widening to add bicycle shoulders to rural section; sharrows on curb side.

Segment Segment Key 35th Street, Indiana to Minnesota
Minnesota Avenue, 35th .48 to 31st Street Minnesota Avenue, 31st to 29th .24
2-lane neighborhood collector; 22 feet rural section 2-lane neighborhood collector, 22 feet
NA
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. Crossing to Eisenhower Middle School. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. Transition to signalized crossing at Wisconsin Avenue using signalized offset intersection design. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification; coincident with Route 8 Sharrows or painted shoulder 10.5 feet from face of curb Two-way sidepath/cycle track on north side of street, most of which is on park property None
NA
4 5
Wisconsin Avenue, 29th to 25th 25th, Wisconsin to Indiana Indiana Avenue, 21st to 25th 21st Street, Indiana to Hillcrest Community Center Hillcrest/Freedom Valley Parks, park boundary to Indiana Avenue overpass of I-70 Indiana Avenue, I-70 to 10th Street
.50 .20
2-lane local; 27 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector, 27-37 feet
NA 1,580
Same Same with one-sided parking and striped parking lane. Minor widening to provide full scale bike lanes Same
6 7
.50 .30
2-lane collector, 28 feet 2,785 4-lane urban arterial, 48 feet Park 8,420
.67
NA
Multi-use trail through parks on topographically accessible alignment, leaving public land at the Indiana Avenue interstate overpass. Minor widening to standard two-lane section with bike lanes.
.5
2-lane collector; 22 feet
1,035
Sharrows
154
18
hillcrest bikeway
6 1 2 3 5 4 7 8
18 17
segment keys
155
19
1
arrowhead bikeway
Length (Miles) .19 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT Short Term Options Short segments of multi-use trail under I-470 and 2-way cycle track along north side of 37th to Wood Valley intersection. Sharrows; defined crossing with caution signage for Gage Blvd motorists Sharrows Ultimate Design Same

Segment Segment Key 37th-Oak Parkway to 37th-Wood Valley
Shunga Creek tributary 5,415 and north side of 37th on Street 37th 2-lane continuous local; 25-27 feet 2-lane local, 27 feet NA
35th/34th/33rd Terrace, 37-Wood Valley to Gage Blvd
1.04
Same
33rd Terrace/SW Skyline .66 Parkway to terminus of street Skyline Park .39
NA
Same
NA
NA
Multi-use trail segment connecting SW Skyline Pkwy to head of Skyline Drive Sharrows Sharrows
Same
5 6 7
Skyline Dr/33rd Street to Fairlawn 33rd Street, Fairlawn to Arrowhead Belle Avenue, 33rd to 37th
.15 .41 .58
2-lane continuous local; 25 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 31 feet
NA 2,290 NA
Same Sharrows with one-sided parking in a painted parking lane.
Same First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification; spur of Arrowhead system connecting Routes 18 and 16. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification Sharrows; coincident with Route 3 Enhanced bicycle boulevard with traffic calming features; potential of one-sided parking in a painted parking lane Same
Arrowhead, 33rd to 25th 25th Street Overpass over I-470, Arrowhead to Belle Belle Avenue, 25th to 20th
.98
2-lane collector; 31 feet 3,430
.19
2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 27 feet
4,255
10
.58
NA
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification; coincident with Route 4; signalized intersection at 21st Street
Same
156
19
arrowhead bikeway
10
8 4 6 7 5 3 2 1
18 3
segment keys
157
19
11
arrowhead bikeway
Length (Miles) .13 Street Type and Width 2-lane local; 27 feet 2011 ADT NA Short Term Options Sharrows; 20th Street alignment avoids difficult intersection at 21st and Arrowhead First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. Defined crossing at 17th Street. First stage bicycle boulevard along new street segment between 17th and Drury, with sharrows and identification. Bicycle boulevard continues in existing street with onesided parking in striped parking lane. Coincident with Route 10. Ultimate Design Same
Segment Segment Key 20th, Belle to Arrowhead
12
Arrowhead, 20th to 17th Arrowhead, 17th to Huntoon
.41
2-lane neighborhood collector; 25-27 feet No street between 17th and Drury; 2-lane local, Drury to Huntoon; 29 feet
NA
Same
13
.52
NA
Same
14 15 16
Huntoon, Arrowhead to Chatham Place Chatham Place, Huntoon to 10th Mifflin/7th, 10th to 6th and Fairlawn
.44 .5 .70
5-lane urban arterial; 60 feet 2-lane continuous local; 29 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 25 feet
11,000- Restriping to provide bike lanes while 14,570 retaining five-lane section. NA NA Sharrows Sharrows
Same Same Bike lanes incorporated into eventual street widening to serve adjacent office uses; new path on diagonal route behind office development along 7th Street to 6th and Fairlawn intersection. Same
17
6th Street, Fairlawn to Governors Lake Road Governors Lake Road, 6th to terminus of road Lane to Cedar Crest Mansion
.25
2-3 lane urban arterial with paved shoulders, 42-54 feet
4,000
Use existing paved shoulders as bike lanes Use existing paved shoulders as bike lanes Use existing path
18 19
.14 .43
2-lane access road with NA shoulders 10 foot path NA
Same Same
158
19
arrowhead bikeway
19 18 16 17
15 14 13
18 3
12 11 1
primary route 19 Connecting routes other system links Connecting trails segment keys
159
20
1
sherwood/elevation bikeway

Segment Segment Key 37th Street, Wood Valley to Gage Blvd. Length (Miles) .82 Street Type and Width 2-lane rural section arterial; 24 feet 2011 ADT 4,3905,185 Short Term Options None Ultimate Design Complete street design as part of a future Elevation Parkway, including bike lanes
2 3
Elevation Parkway, Gage to Wanamaker 41st Street, Wanamaker to Gamwell
1.92 .60
Future arterial corridor 2-lane rural section arterial 2-lane, continuous local system; 25 to 27 feet
NA 3,330
None Off-street, one-way EB path or shoulder for climbing. Sharrows
Complete street design with bike lanes and off-street option Bike lanes; as part of an Elevation Parkway project, may be upgraded to complete street standards Same
2.20 Gamwell/40th Street/ Canterbury Town Drive/ Robins Drive/Kings Forest Drive/Falcon Drive from 41st Street to Indian Hills Road Indian Hills Road, 37th to 33rd Street 33rd Street, Indian Hills to Gisbourne Lane Gisbourne Lane/ Tutbury Town Rd, 33rd to 29th 29th, Tutbury Town to Wanamaker .53
1,095 at Indian Hills
2-lane collector; 25 feet, rural section 2-lane minor arterial, rural section; 25 feet 2-lane local; 25 feet, rural section 5-lane multi-use arterial; 60 feet
130
Sharrows
Same; bike shoulders or lanes with increased future development and potential upgrade of street. Bike shoulders or lanes with increased future development and potential upgrade of street. Same
1.25
1,985
Sharrows
.60
NA
Sharrows
1.64
7,41511,490
Sidepath on south side of reconstructed street
Same
160
20
sherwood/elevation bikeway
8 7 6 5 1
2 4 3
20 16
segment keys
161
21
1
College bikeway
Length (Miles) .33 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT NA Short Term Options Ultimate Design
Segment Segment Key College Avenue, Shunga Trail to 21st Street College Avenue crossing at 21st Street
2-lane neighborhood avenue; 29-36 feet
Sharrows; striped 7-foot parking lanes Same when width is 36 feet or above
Crossing of 5-lane multi-use arterial; 60 feet .17 5-lane multi-use
19,430 Enhanced crossing with median refuge on west leg of intersection, where left turns are not permitted; defined crosswalk 19,430 Widening of existing path to add a separated two-way cycle track between College and Jewell Avenue entrance. NA Sharrows using Jewell and Plass to 17th Street. Sharrows
Same; possible ped/bike actuated signalization at crossing
21st Street, College to Jewell Avenue entrance
Same.
Washburn University campus to 17th and Plass Plass Avenue, 17th to 15th 15th Street, Plass to College
.54
2-lane campus street system 2-lane neighborhood avenue; width varies from 29 to 41 feet 2-lane continuous local; 30-31 feet
Sidepath on Washburn Avenue edge of campus, connecting 21st and College and 17th and College. (3A). Same
.20
NA
.23
NA
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. Coincident with Route 7 Defined crossing at 17th Street. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification. Painted 7-foot parking lanes along 41-foot section. Sharrows.
Enhanced bicycle boulevard with traffic calming techniques at key locations, and single-sided parking in striped parking lane. Same.
College Avenue, 17th to 7th Avenue
1.4
2-lane neighborhood avenue; width varies from 29 to 41 feet
NA
7th Avenue/Mulvane St to 6th Avenue
.18
2-lane local, 28-31 feet
NA
Same.
162
21
9
College bikeway
Length (Miles) .08 Street Type and Width 2011 ADT NA Short Term Options Ultimate Design
Segment Segment Key Willow Park, 6th and Mulvane to Willow and Elmwood Elmwood Avenue, Willow to 1st
Park
Existing path through Willow Park. Defined crossings at intersections with 6th and Willow Avenues. Sharrows
Widened path to trail standard.
10
.32
2-lane local, 31 feet
NA
Same
4 3 1 2 3a
5 6 7 8 9 10
21 16
segment keys
163
22
1
11th street bikeway

Length (Miles) .34 Street Type and Width 2-lane collector; 27 feet 2011 ADT NA Short Term Options Sharrows Ultimate Design Minor widening for bike lanes; alternative is WB sharrow and EB cycle track and pedestrian path through Cushinberry Park. Same with removal of parking.
Segment Segment Key 15th Street, Shunga Trail to Monroe/Quincy
Monroe (SB), 10th Avenue to 17th Street Quincy Street (NB), 17th Avenue to 12th Street Quincy Street (NB), 12th to 10th Avenue
.59
Two-lane, oneway neighborhood collector; 27-30 feet Two-lane local; 30-36 feet Two to five-lane downtown street; 3064 feet
NA
One-way SB bike lane; if parking remains, this may be a shared bike/ parking lane. NB sharrow, with jog using alley between 13th and 14th Street around Williams Magnet School. NB bike lane by removing unnecessary on-street parking on 12th to 11th block; lane reconfiguration on 11th to 10th block to provide NB bike lane. Sharrows in outer lanes in either direction; striped parallel parking lanes. Recommended reversal of diagonal parking to back-in design for bicycle and pedestrian safety.
.57
NA
Same with NB bike lane where width permits, with one-side parking. Same.
.20
NA
10th Avenue, Monroe to .48 Topeka Blvd.
Typically 5-lane, twoway downtown street, with diagonal parking on some blocks; 7076 feet, excluding diagonal parking areas 5-lane urban arterial; 60
Land reconfiguration to provide bike lanes, with 10-foot travel lanes, 7-foot parking lanes, and 5-foot bike lanes in 74-foot section.
10th Avenue, Topeka Blvd. to Western Avenue
.32
12,270 Sharrows in outer lanes
Land reconfiguration to provide bike lanes, with 10-foot minimum travel lanes, and 5-foot bike lanes in 60-foot section; alternative road diet establishing threelane or four-lane assymetrical section with bike lanes and center left-turn lane. Same
Western Avenue, 10th to 11th (Munson)
.22
2-lane neighborhood collector, 31 feet
1,050
Sharrows
164
22
11th street bikeway
11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
22 16
segment keys
165
22
8
11th street bikeway

Length (Miles) 1.29 Street Type and Width 2-lane continuous local; 25-31 feet 2011 ADT NA Short Term Options First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows, identification, and reduction of stop signs to provide bicycle priority; defined crossings at Washburn and lane intersections. Alignment jogs from Munson to 11th at Fillmore Street. Use of existing bridge, with advisory to walk bikes. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows, identification, and reduction of stop signs to provide bicycle priority. First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows, identification, and reduction of stop signs to provide bicycle priority. Ultimate Design Same
Segment Segment Key 11th Street, Western Avenue to Washburn Park at Collins Street
9 10
11th Street bridge at Washburn Park 11th Street, Billard Avenue to Cambridge Avenue
.06 .46
Pedestrian bridge in park 2-lane continuous local; 25-27 feet
NA NA
Replacement with standard, prefabricated trail bridge. Same.
11
Cambridge, 11th to 10th .12
2-lane continuous local; 26 feet
NA
Same.
12
10th Street, Cambridge to Gage
.14
Three- to five-lane multi-use arterial, with protected left-turns at 10th; 48-62 feet.
12,000 Lane reconfiguration with three to five lane taper approaching Gage Boulevard. 10 to 11-foot lane width permits introduction of bike lane to the left of WB to NB right-turn only lane.
Same
166
22
11th street bikeway
11 10 9 8
22 16
segment keys
167
23
1
north topeka bikeway

Length (Miles) .52 Street Type and Width 4-lane with center median to 5-lane downtown boulevard; 90 feet with diagonal parking Dual bridge with 2 travel lanes in each direction; 25 feet channel width in each direction 2-lane downtown streets and alley; 36 to 40 foot streets, 22 foot alley 2-lane downtown street; 36 to 45 feet 2-lane downtown avenue with diagonal parking; 57 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet 2011 ADT 9,125 Short Term Options Sharrows in outer travel lane Ultimate Design
Bike lanes or cycle tracks incorporated into final design of Kansas Avenue. Section to be determined, could include one travel lane in each direction, a left-turn lane or median; and bike lanes. Cycle track may be located between pedestrian path and parking.
Segment Segment Key Kansas Avenue, 6th to 1st Avenue
Kansas/Quincy Bridge, 1st Avenue to Laurent Street
.66
9,200
Sharrows with associated use of walks Same. Possible use of advisory colored on SB side of bridge bike lanes, establishing a visible bicycle territory in the outer travel lanes.
Laurent/QuincyMonroe Alley/Norris St to Kansas Laurent, Quincy to Kansas Kansas Avenue, Norris to Fairchild Fairchild/Central Avenue, Kansas to Soldier Creek Trail
.28
NA
NB Route: Sharrows with defined on-street parking lanes on Laurent/ Norris; sharrows on Quincy-Monroe alley SB Route: Sharrows with defined onstreet parking lanes. Sharrows
Same. Possible path though park between bridge and alley
4 5
.08 .30
NA 1,415
Same. Same, with back-in diagonal parking for greater safety Same.
.59
NA
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows, identification, and reduction of stop signs to provide bicycle priority. Alternative path through plaza to Central Ave cul-desac Same as existing
Soldier Creek Trail, Central Avenue to Lyman Road Lyman Road, Soldier Creek Trail to Tyler
1.00
Existing 10-foot trail
Same
.22
3-lane urban arterial; 40 feet with right turn lane at Tyler
7,705
Midblock crossing at trail, two-way sidepath on north side of street
Upgrade midblock crossing with median refuge and HAWK or similar ped actuated signal.
168
23
9
north topeka bikeway

Length (Miles) .22 Street Type and Width 3-lane urban arterial, 38 feet 5-lane multi-use arterial tapering to 2-lane, rural arterial 2011 ADT 8,070 Short Term Options Sharrows in curb lane; probable use of interior drives in parking lots for shopping center bound users. Design depends on design of US 24 improvement. Medium term option is a two-way sidepath on the east side of Rochester Road, connecting to an extension of the Soldier Creek Trail. Ultimate Design Two-way sidepath on east side of street.
Segment Segment Key Tyler St, Lyman to US 24
10
Tyler St/Rochester Road, US 24 to Soldier Creek
.31
16,455
11
11
10
2.81
9
2-lane rural arterial
8
4,2005,565
7
None, other than use of parallel lowvolume roads (Green Hills)
Incorporate full bicycle access into design of the US 24 improvement project. Sidepath on east side of Rochester to Soldier Creek Trail may be an adequate long-term solution, transitioning to bicycle 6 shoulders on Rochester Road north of the creek. Addition of paved shoulders accommodating bicycles to rural section; inclusion of bike lanes into any future urban section upgrade
Rochester Road, Soldier Creek to Seamon High School
1 2 3nb 4sb 5 6
10
11
23 15
segment keys
169
24
1
lyman/silver lake bikeway

Length (Miles) .20 Street Type and Width 2-lane drive and business district local street; 26 feet 2-lane downtown avenue with diagonal parking; 57 feet 2-lane neighborhood collector; 32 feet ADT (2011) NA Short Term Options Sharrows Ultimate Design Same
Segment Segment Key Great Overland Station to Kansas and Curtis
Kansas Ave, Curtis to Fairchild St Fairchild/Central Ave, Kansas Avenue to Soldier Creek Trail
.43
1,415
Sharrows
Same, with back-in diagonal parking for greater safety Same.
.59
NA
First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows, identification, and reduction of stop signs to provide bicycle priority. Alternative path through plaza to Central Ave cul-desac Existing
Soldier Creek Trail, Central Avenue to Lyman Road Soldier Creek bridge for bicycle access to commercial uses on North Topeka Blvd Central Ave North, Soldier Creek to North Topeka Blvd. Lyman Road, Soldier Creek Trail to Vail Avenue Vail Avenue, Lyman Road to Lower Silver Lake Road Lower Silver Lake Road, Vail to Brickyard Road
.96
Existing Trail
NA
Same
.06
NA
NA
Soldier Creek Trail to Topeka Blvd. sidewalk; routing of bicycles on sidewalk to Bowery Street. Sharrows for local access to North Topeka commercial development; existing Topeka Blvd. sidewalks to Lyman Road Share the Road signage
Approximately 230 foot pedestrian/bike bridge between two ends of Central Ave.
.59
2-lane business district local; 20 feet
NA
Sidewalk widening to cycle track standards
1.36
2-lane rural section arterial; 24 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 24 feet 2-lane rural section arterial; 24 feet
2,640
Minor widening with bicycle shoulders on rural section roadway Minor widening with bicycle shoulders on rural section roadway Minor widening with bicycle shoulders on rural section roadway
.46
2,025
Share the Road signage
1.66
2,875
Share the Road signage
170
24
10
lyman/silver lake bikeway

Length (Miles) Street Type and Width 4-lane divided rural arterial (Lower Silver Lake); 4-lane, divided freeway (US 75) ADT (2007) 8,955 (Silver Lake); 50,000 (US 75) Short Term Options Legal but hazardous and inadvisable southbound access on US 75 bridge to Danbury. Ultimate Design New westside pedestrian/bicycle bridge, possibly with two-way cycle track on south side of Lower Silver Lake defined crossings of ramps; and addition to west side of Gateway Bridge (US 75).
Segment Segment Key Kansas River Crossing, Lower Silver Lake Road and US 75 to Danbury Lane
7 8 4 9 5 10 3 6
24 15
Connecting trails
segment keys
171
25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
46th street/hunters ridge bikeway

Length (Miles)
.77
Segment Segment Key

Menninger Rd, Rochester Rd to Green Hills Rd Green Hills Rd, Menninger to NW 39th St NW 39th St, Green Hills to Button Rd Button Rd, NW 39th to NW 43rd NW 43rd, Button to Oakley Oakley, NW 43rd to NW 46th NW 46th, Oakley to Brickyard Rd Brickyard Rd, NW 46th to NW 25th NW 25th Street between Brickyard Rd. segments Brickyard Rd, NW 25th to US 24 Frontage Road US 24 Frontage Road between Brickyard Rd. sections Brickyard Rd, US 24 Frontage Road to Lower Silver Lake Road

2-lane rural section collector, 20 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 21 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 21 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 25 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 26 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 31 feet 2-lane rural section with roundabouts; 24 feet with gravel shoulders 2-lane rural section collector; 24 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 24 feet 4-lane divided collector 2-lane industrial frontage road; 24 feet 2-lane rural section collector; 24 feet
ADT (2011)
960
Short Term Options

Sharrows with share the road signage
Ultimate Design
Paved shoulders also designed to accommodate bicycle traffic Paved shoulders also designed to accommodate bicycle traffic Same Same Same Paved shoulders also designed to accommodate bicycle traffic Paved shoulders also designed to accommodate bicycle traffic Paved shoulders also designed to accommodate bicycle traffic Same Same Paved shoulders also designed to accommodate bicycle traffic; final configuration depends on US 24 upgrade project. Paved shoulders also designed to accommodate bicycle traffic
1.00 1.00 .50 .60 .40 .38
360 NA NA NA NA 4,5757,165 1,515 860 1,765 NA
Sharrows with share the road signage Sharrows with share the road signage Sharrows with share the road signage Sharrows with share the road signage Sharrows with share the road signage Sharrows with share the road signage
8 9 10 11
2.40 .25 .38 .28
Sharrows with share the road signage Sharrows with share the road signage Sharrows in outer lanes with share the road signage Sharrows with share the road signage
12
1,765
Sharrows with share the road signage
172
25
13
46th street/hunters ridge bikeway

Length (Miles) 2.40 Street Type and Width 2-lane rural section arterial; 24 feet ADT (2011) 6,615 Short Term Options None Ultimate Design Paved shoulders also designed to accommodate bicycle traffic
Segment Segment Key NW 46th, Rochester to Oakley
25 23
segment keys
173
t
T1 T2
regional trail segments

Length (Miles) of New or Rehabilitated Path
4.50 (1.16 of separated trail from Fairlawn to Gage) --
Segment Segment Key

Shunga Trail
Comments
Resurfacing and enhancement of existing trail from Topeka Blvd. to Fairlawn. Separation of pedestrian and bicycle tracks from Gage to Fairlawn. Installation of lighting and visibility aids, such as mirrors, at underpass. Assumes completion in 2012 of extension from Fairlawn to McClure. New trail within city.
Landon Trail
T3
Deer Creek Trail, Shunga to 10th Street Deer Creek/Dornwood Trail, 10th to 29th Lake Shawnee Trail Levee Trail, Soldier Creek Trail, Lyman to Brickyard Road Kansas River Trail, Murray Hill to Topeka Blvd Bridge
--
New trail within city
T4 T5 T6 T7 T8
2.50 .40 4.70 3.90 5.90 (approximate)
Includes new Wittenberg Road bridge over Kansas Turnpike. Short-term use of sharrows or advisory bike lane on bridge. Realignment and replacement of overly steep grade along south leg of trail. Connects with Soldier Creek Trail at Garfield Park. Trail deck on Kansas River Railroad bridge adds .2 miles.
Based on long-term abandonment of south bank BNSF line
174
regional trail segments
new or rehabilitated trails
175
priorities and implementation

The proposed Topeka bikeways network will be implemented in phases, and will almost certainly evolve over time. However, this plan establishes both an initial phase that guides activity during the next five years, and a concept for how the network emerges incrementally from that foundation. The sequencing of phases and specific routes proposed here follows these criteria and principles: response to demands. In every phase, high priority routes should address existing demand patterns, and serve destinations that are valuable to users and appropriate endpoints for bicycle transportation. The survey results summarized in chapter three provide valuable information on the importance of various destinations. route integrity. High priority routes and projects should provide continuity between valid endpoints such as destinations and trails. When developed incrementally, routes should not leave users at loose ends. extensions of existing facilities. Projects that make use of and extend the reach of key existing facilities such as the Shunga and Landon trails, should have a significant priority. Gaps. Small projects that fill gaps in current facilities or tie relatively remote neighborhoods to the overall system can be especially useful at early stages n the systems development. opportunities. The implementation sequence should take advantage of opportunities such as street projects such as the Wanamaker and 10th Street improvements, resurfacing and street rehabilitation projects, major investments such as proposed Polk
Quincy viaduct, and other infrastructure projects. relative ease of development. It is important that the a useful system be established relatively quickly and at comparatively low cost. Routes that require major capital cost or neighborhood controversy should be deferred to later phases, when precedents are established and the network becomes part of Topekas urban landscape.
While ease of development should not supersede other key factors, it is nevertheless a key strategic factor as Topeka begins to put its system on the ground. Projects or routes that perform well on other criteria and are relatively easy and inexpensive to achieve can provide early, substantive accomplishments that build future momentum. The citys complete streets policy requires consideration of multimodal transportation in new projects, and provides a specific annual allocation to adapt or enhance active transportation. This significant and predictable annual allocation adapts particularly well to projects that accomplish much per dollar spent. Routes that Figure 6.1 rates segments of the network by their relative developability. These developability categories include: implementation without change. These segments can be put in place with minimum change, primarily pavement markings and supporting graphics. They involve the lowest cost and least impact. Typical examples are streets with sharrows or enough width for bicycle lanes without other lane modifications. implementation with minor change. These segments and routes typically involve lane reconfigurations, such as narrower lanes, or parking change, such as possible limitation of parking to one side of the street. However, they do not require
176
changes in the number of available travel lanes. Major lane modifications. These segments use existing street channels, but require major lane modifications such as road diets that reduce the number of available lanes while still remaining fully capable of accommodating current traffic volumes. minor roadway widening. These road segments widen existing streets to provide shoulders or bicycle lanes. major roadway construction. These projects include new streets or major reconstructions of existing streets, designed as complete streets to include bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. connecting links. These on-street links connect major routes in the system. Typically, they fall within the implementation without change category, requiring only pavement markings and information and identification graphics. projects under development. These segments are opportunities that take advantage of projects either under construction or in the short-term pipeline as of fall, 2011. existing trails. These facilities are in place and are
adaptation without change. Both College Avenue (left) and East 6th Street (right) can be adapted to bikeway use without changing parking or traffic flow characteristics. The proposed solution at College would stripe parking lanes and use sharrows in travel lanes. Sixth is wide enough to use bike lanes without modification.
incorporated into the bicycle transportation system in their current form.

minor path development and gap filling. These separated segments include short pathways that fill gaps in the system or relatively short stretches of new sidepaths or cycle tracks within existing right-of-way.
Adaptation with Minor or Major Lane Modifications. While both adaptations can be implemented at low cost, they both involve at least minor lane modification. Huntoon Street at left would change lane widths to include a bike lane, or provide a bike lane combined with a combination peak hour travel lane/off-peak parking lane. Sixth Street downtown would slightly reduce lane width to make room for bike lanes.
177
major path or trail development. These elements are major new trails on exclusive right-of-way. They do not include all facilities proposed by Topekas regional trails and greenways plan, but only those that are integral to the bicycle transportation system. intersection projects. These projects involve intersections of a bikeway route with a major arterial street. These projects generally include refuge medians or short cycle tracks that resolve offset intersections.
Major Lane Modifications. Above left: 17th Street over Interstate 470 (Route 10) and East 6th Street (Route 1) are examples of streets that accommodate bicycle lanes with major in-channel modifications such road diets, reducing the number of travel lanes to provide bicycle accommodation. This device should be a tool in the Topeka system, but is used relatively infrequently in this plan. Topekas good secondary street system makes road diets less necessary than in many other cities.
The System Developability Categories Map on the facing page classifies segments on the proposed Topeka Bikeways System based on relative ease of development.
sequencing
The Sequencing Map combines the developability categories with the other priority criteria to stage the network in five time periods. Complete system development may occur within fifteen years, suggesting three-year development phases. Actual implementation depends on the amount of available funding. However, early program phases include the most immediately developable routes or route segments, with later stages involving major regional trails, street reconstructions, and development of new streets such as the proposed Elevation Parkway in Southwest Topeka.
minor street Widening. Two-lane collector streets like indiana Avenue above serve important destinations like schools, parks, and community centers, and have manageable traffic volumes, but provide little comfort to many riders. Minor widenings with shoulders that function as bike lanes can provide a safer facility for all modes.
major roadway construction. High volume streets like 10th Street east of Wanamaker will undergo major construction to increase capacity. Future widenings or construction of new streets on the system should be built to complete street standards.
178
Developability Categories
Existing Trails Connecting Links
Intersection Projects
179
pilot system: the starting point

While the City and the bicycling community will help to determine the order of projects within each phase, the system must start to emerge with some specific routes and route segments. This pilot system establishes the foundation of the ultimate network, and should provide maximum impact for minimum initial investment, link all parts of the city, and serve proven destinations and traffic patterns. The pilot system illustrated on the following pages assembles route segments that fit these criteria, capable of demonstrating the potential for bicycle transportation in Topeka.
gap filling. These high priority projects use small pathway segments to create major connections and represent extremely high value for each dollar of investment. Above, a path under I-470 following a Shunga Creek tributary connects the Wood Valley area and south part of Topeka to the Shunga Trail system and other parts of the bikeway network. major trails. A trail through Dornwood Park connecting to the Deer Creek Trail is a critical link that makes Lake Shawnee accessible to much of the rest of the city.
Street-Oriented Pilot Routes Components of the recommended pilot system include: route 1 (East-West Bikeway) between the Shunga Trail at Market Street near Scott Magnet School to Gage Park and 10th and Belle Avenue. This route incorporates new bike lanes along 6th on the east side and a popular existing route along 8th Avenue. route 2 (Randolph Bikeway) between Hummer Sports Park and 37th and Randolph. This north-south route connects parks and schools with the Shunga Trail and Sunga Creek greenway, and links the north and south sides of Topeka. It also intersects the East-West route at 8th Avenue. route 3 (25th street bikeway) between Belle and Urish Avenues. This segment of the longer Route 3 uses takes advantage of a moderately trafficked crossing of I-470 to link westside neighborhoods to the rest of the system, including the Shunga Trail. route 4 (belle bikeway) between Gage Park and the Shunga Trail at Crestview Park and Fairlawn Road. This

sequencing. The connection between Downtown and Oakland along the Kansas River (part of Route 5) is a scenic route that links important parts of town. It also includes a mid-street promenade using a disused railroad right-of-way along First Street, and a connection to the Levee Trail over a little used railroad bridge. However, the impact of a long-term capital project (Polk-Quincy Viaduct on I-70) and the short-term status of the railroad cause this important link to a later stage of development.
180
sequencing. The ease of establishing bike lanes on a strategic street that knits east and west sides together elevates this segment of 6th Street to a high phase.
sequencing Concept
Phase One: 2012-2014 Phase Two: 2015-2017 Phase Three: 2018-2020 Phase Four: 2021-2023 Phase Five: 2024-2026
181
Completed system
an evolving system
The Topeka Bikeway System will develop in phases, each of which meets the system criteria discussed earlier through every stage of the development process. The maps on these pages illustrate how the system might evolve in five phases. While changes in projects and opportunities will inevitably cause changes in sequencing, it is important to make steady and continuous progress. The overall sequencing strategy calls for a focus on relatively attainable, low-cost street adaptations and highly popular trail projects to maximize bicycle transportation among probable urban cyclists. An increased and visible role for bicycle transportation then makes larger capital investments more acceptable in later stages, expanding bicycling into new markets.
phase one
Phase One combines existing trails with relatively easily convertible streets and short, gap-filling path segments to create the foundation for the comprehensive bikeways system. The phase one system provides service to all parts of the city, and generally reflects the pilot system presented in this chapter. Its densest coverage, though, occurs in the central part of Topeka, providing (with the Shunga Trail) a grid of three continuous east-west and northsouth corridors. It also connects Lake Shawnee to the rest of the citywide network.
phase two
Phase Two adds to the coverage of the central city grid and fills out service in the southwestern and southeastern parts of the city. It establishes a direct east-west street connection to Lake Shawnee and adds on-street service that parallels the Wanamaker Road commercial corridor. It also includes development of the Levee Trail on the north side of the Kansas River.
182
phase three
Phase Three completes most of the on-street system that can be developed without substantial capital construction. It completes much of the bikeways street system on the west side of the system, and adds important, but more limited connections in the east. It also anticipates completion of the Kaw River Trail on the south bank and extension of the north bank Levee Trail to Garfield Park in North Topeka.
phase Four
Phase Four adds some on-street connections, but assumes that bicycle transportations mode share has increased to the degree that significant capital projects, such as minor widening for bike lanes, become acceptable to the Topeka public. Strategically, less expensive, on-street projects using the existing system maximize mode share among street-capable cyclists, and the system has matured to address new markets who are less comfortable with sharing even lightly traveled streets. The majority of phase four projects are on the eastern and northern peripheries of the city, where rural road sections and development patterns encourage minor widenings. Phase Four may also see enhancement of some parts of the urban system. It also anticipates completion of the Polk/Quincy I-70 project and associated bike facilities.
phase Five
Phase Five completes the system by including major long-range projects that would be developed to complete street standards. Some of these projects (such as Urish Road) may be completed much earlier in the process because of traffic and development demand, and the phasing would adjust accordingly. Phase Five projects focus around the north, west, and south peripheries of the city. They may also include upgrades of the in-city system to the ultimate design
183
westside connection adapts Belle Avenue, a popular route that connects to the Shunga Trail, to bicycle boulevard status, and takes advantage of a pending improvement project along 10th Street. route 8 (Clay/25th street bikeway) between Ward Meade Park and Dornwood Park, utilizing Clay, Buchanan, and 25th Streets to form a long, L-shaped route that serves schools, community centers, and parks. It includes a new direct connection to the Shunga Trail at the Buchanan Avenue bridge over Shunga Creek. route 14 (Golden bikeway) between the Shunga Trail at the Golden Avenue crossing and Oakland-Billard Park. This segment of a longer future route serves the Oakland neighborhood and connects a major park, community center, and schools to the main system. It also provides a short-term, safe commuter route to downtown, in advance of a longer-term project along River Drive. route 17 (33rd street bikeway), between the Landon Trail at 37th Street and Lake Shawnee. This is the eastern segment of a longer east-west route that provides a short-term solution to connecting the Lake Shawnee Trail into the rest of the citys network. The route utilizes a lightly travelled portion of 37th Street and a new bridge crossing linking Betty Phillips Park and its surrounding neighborhood to the new segment of the Landon Trail. route 21 (College bikeway) from Edgewood Park to the Shunga Trail. This north-south route connects the historic Potwin neighborhood and Willow Park to Washburn University and the Shunga Greenway. It uses existing streets through the university campus. route 23 (north topeka bikeway) from 6th and
Kansas to the Soldier Creek Greenway. This initial segment links North Topeka into the system by way of the Kansas Avenue bridge and a bicycle boulevard along Central Avenue to the existing trail. The Topeka Boulevard bridge is not included in the pilot system because of the probable disruption created by construction of the Polk/Quincy project. Van buren street between First Street and the Capitol. This connecting street easily accommodates bike lanes, and provides a highly visible path to the Capitol Building. 19th street. This short segment of the ultimate Route 9 (Washburn Bikeway) connects the Randolph Bikeway to the College Bikeway and Washburn campus. 11th street. This short bicycle boulevard segment of the 11th Street Bikeway (Route 22) serves the Public Library and Topeka High School, two key destinations.
Trail and Pathway Segments Priority trail segments that support the pilot on-street network include: the planned extension of the shunga trail under I-470 to McClure Street and French Middle School. The Deer Creek/Dornwood Trail system, connecting the current terminus of the Deer Creek Trail at 10th Street to the Lake Shawnee Trail. the wood Valley link from 37th and randolph under i-470. This short but strategic pathway follows a Shunga Creek tributary under I-470 and provides a badly needed link between south Topeka neighborhoods like Wood Valley to the rest of the network.
184
pilot bikeways network

185
Opportunities The pilot network should also take advantage of opportunities presented by street rehabilitation or major construction projects as they emerge. Examples include resurfacing of 10th Street and the Lane/Washburn one-way pair. These projects should include pavement markings or sections consistent with the recommendations of the Bikeways Plan.
implementation and opinion of probable cost

The Probable Cost table presents a generalized opinion of costs for the pilot system, based on unit cost factors per mile for various facility types displayed in the table on this page. These projected costs are in 2011 dollars and include 10% design fees and 15% contingency.
estimated Cost per mile by Facility type

trail type
10-foot asphalt trail on separated right-of-way 10-foot concrete trail on separated right-of-way 10-foot two-way concrete sidepath 5-foot one-way concrete sidepaths (including full installation on both sides of the street) Mid-block or mid-section crossing with defined crossings and beacons Mid-block or mid-section crossing with center refuge median and beacons 12-foot wide prefabricated bridge 5-foot bicycle lanes (incremental cost for new street construction projects (single side) Bicycle lane pavement markings on existing streets Bicycle lane pavement markings on existing streets with lane modification Shared route markings (sharrows plus signage) on existing streets First stage bicycle boulevard with signage Enhanced bicycle boulevard with traffic calmers
cost/unit
$264,000/mile $385,000/mile $300,000/mile $330,000/mile $30,000 each $50,000 each $1,320/foot $77,000/mile asphalt $137,500/mile concrete $15,000/mile $25,000/mile $7,500/mile $15,000/mile $30,000-50,000/mile
Includes 10% allowance for design fees and 15% contingency. *Assumes one to two traffic calming treatments per mile (such as circles, speed tables, curb extensions, etc.)
186
pilot bikeways network: opinion of probable Cost

Route 1 Segment Market Street, Shunga Trail to 6th Avenue 6th Avenue, Golden to Lamar 6th Avenue, Lamar to Shunga Creek 6th Avenue, Shunga Creek to Adams 6th Avenue, Adams to Monroe 6th Avenue, Monroe to Van Buren Van Buren, 6th to 8th Avenue 8th Avenue, Van Buren to Tyler 8th Avenue, Tyler to Clay 8th Avenue, Clay to Lincoln 8th Avenue, Lincoln to Summit, Summit to Gage Park Gage Street Intersection Gage Park, 8th Street to Westchester 10th Avenue, Westchester to Belle Avenue totals .78 .46 6.22 Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) .33 .42 .60 .24 .22 .32 .21 .24 .40 .15 1.85 Sharrows and signage between existing bridge and 6th. Bike lanes Bike lanes Lane modification with bike lanes Lane modification with bike lanes Lane modification with bike lanes Bike lanes with installation of back-in diagonal parking Lane modification with bike lanes Lane modification with bike lanes Lane modification with bike lanes First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers Defined crossing and warning beacons 10 foot sidepath 10 foot sidepath; 5 feet of path should be attributed to planned street project Unit Cost 7,500/mi 15,000/mi 15,000/mi 25,000/mi 25,000/mi 25,000/mi 25,000/mi 25,000/mi 25,000/mi 25,000/mi 15,000/mi 25,000/mi 300,000/ mi 300,000/ mi Cost Comments 2,475 Market Street crossing to Shunga Trail was previously completed 6,300 9,000 6,000 5,500 8,000 5,250 6,000 10,000 3,750 27,750 30,000 234,000 69,000 Cost is for extra path width along planned construction project. 423,025 street adaptation costs are $120,025 of the total.
187

Route 2 Segment Randolph, 37th to 33rd Randolph, 33rd to 30th Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) .58 First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers .29 First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, striped parking lanes .15 First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers .1 Widening of existing sidewalk to sidepath standards .05 Existing .50 10 foot asphalt or concrete trail .53 First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers .70 First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification 1.30 First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification Defined crosswalks with warning beacons .36 Sharrows 4.56 Unit Cost 15,000/mi 20,000/mi Cost 8,700 5,800 Comments
Randolph, 30th to 29th Brookwood Spur, Randolph to Brookwood Shopping Center Shunga Trail Spur, 29th Street to Shunga Trail Trail Extension, Shunga Trail to SW Randolph at TARC Randolph, TARC to 21st Street Randolph, 21st to 15th Randolph, 15th to 6th 6th Street Intersection at Randolph/Tuffy Kellogg Tuffy Kellogg Drive, 6th Street to Outer Circle Drive totals
15,000/mi 150,000/ mi NA 264,000/ mi 25,000/mi 15,000/mi 15,000/mi 30,000 ea 7,500/mi
2,250 15,000
132,000 Cost assumes asphalt 13,250 Additional cost for enhancement of existing 21st Street intersection 10,500 19,500 30,000 2,700 239,700 Street adaptation costs are $107,700 of the total.
188

Route 3 Segment 25th Street, Belle to Westport 25th Street, Westport to Urish totals Route 4 Segment 28th Street/Belle Avenue, Shunga Trail to 21st Street 21st Street intersection Belle Avenue, 21st to 17th Street Belle Avenue, 17th to Huntoon Street Huntoon Street intersection at Belle Avenue offset Belle Avenue, Huntoon to 10th Avenue totals .58 .52 .03 Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) .42 1.36 1.78 Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) 1.41 First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers Signal loop modifications and sharrows in travel path First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers Unit Cost 15,000/mi 10,000 ea 15,000/mi 15,000/mi First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no clamers Unit Cost 15,000/mi 15,000/mi Cost 6,300 20,400 26,700 Cost 21,150 10,000 8,700 7,800 45,000 Includes off-street, one-way cycle tracks on Huntoon between offset segments. 7,950 Connects with sidepath to Gage Park proposed in Route 1. 100,600 Comments Comments
Defined bicycle track through offset with 45,000 ea warning beacons First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, no calmers 15,000/mi
.53 3.07
189

Route 8 Segment 25th, Dornwood Park to California 25th, California to Landon Trail 25th/27th, Landon Trail to Buchanan Street Buchanan, 27th-21st Buchanan access to Shunda Trail Buchanan/Hampton, 21st to Clay Clay, 21st to Huntoon .07 1.06 Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) .74 1.32 .95 .51 Bike lanes Sharrows and signage Sharrows and signage First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification New ramp and lighting Sharrows First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification Unit Cost 15,000/mi 7,500/mi 7,500/mi 15,000/mi 65,000 ea 7,500/mi 20,000/mi Cost Comments 11,100 Market Street crossing to Shunga Trail was previously completed 9,900 7,125 7,650 65,000 Includes new trail ramp, pavemnet markings, lighting, and signage 525 21,200 Extra cost includes motorist advisory signs at intersections with 12th and Huntoon 21,450 143,950 Unit Cost 300,000/ mi Cost Comments
Clay, Huntoon to Old Prairie Town total Route 14 Segment Golden, Shunga Trail to Seward Avenue
1.43 6.08
15,000
Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) .42 Sidepath either expanding existing sidewalk on west side of street or developing a new path on east side
126,000 Route plan proposes sharrows as an interim measure. Separated path is preferable solution for a sort segment. Cost is lower if existing walk can be expanded. 21,300 147,300
Chester, Seward to Riverside RV Park total
1.42 1.84
First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification
15,000/mi
190

Route 17 Segment 37th Street, West Edge to California 37th Street, California to Indiana Indiana Avenue, 37th to 35th Terrace 35th Terrace/35th Street, Indiana to Adams 35th Street/Irvingham Street, Adams to Betty Phillips Park Betty Phillips Park to Landon Trail Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) .91 .50 .23 .55 .54 .64 Lane definition with bike lanes Sharrows and signage Sharrows and signage Sharrows and signage Sharrows and signage Sharrows and connecting sidepath on 37th Street to Landon Trail Unit Cost 25,000/mi 7,500/mi 7,500/mi 7,500/mi 7,500/mi
7,500/mi for on-street work, 300,000/mi for sidepath (.1 mile)
Cost 24,750 3,750 1,725 4,125 4,050
Comments
35,000 Uses existing Betty Phillips Park path and pedestrian bridge to H\ umboldt Street. Does not include path modification. 73,400
total Route 23 Segment Kansas Avenue, 6th to 1st Avenue
3.37 Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) .52 Bike lanes Unit Cost 25,000/mi
Cost
Comments
13,000 Alternative of lanes and cycle track should be integrated into Kansas Avenue redesign 13,200 2,800
Kansas/Quincy Bridge, 1st Avenue to Laurent Street Laurent Street/Quincy-Monroe Alley/ Norris Street to Kansas Avenue intersection Laurent, Quincy to Kansas Kansas Avenue, Norris to Fairchild Fairchild/Central Avenue, Kansas to Soldier Creek Trail total
.66 .28
Sharrows and adaptation of walk for SB bike traffic NB Route: Sharrows with defined on-street parking lanes on Laurent/Norris; sharrows on Quincy-Monroe alley Sharrows and signage Sharrows and signage. First-stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification
20,000/mi 10,000/mi.
.08 .30 .59 2.43
7,500/mi 10,000/mi 15,000/mi
600 3,000 Back in diagonal parking should be considered. 8,850 41,450
191

Route 21 Segment College Avenue, Shunga Trail to 21st Street College Avenue crossing at 21st Street 21st Street, College to Jewell Avenue entrance Washburn University campus to 17th and Plass Plass Avenue, 17th to 15th 15th Street, Plass to College College Avenue, 17th to 6th Avenue .17 .54 .20 .23 1.50 Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) .33 Sharrows and signage with striped parking lanes Enhanced crossing with median refuge and warning beacons 10-foot sidepath or widening of existing path to sidepath standards Sharrows on campus streets Sharrows and signage First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification, striped parking lanes Connecting path through park, defined crossing with warning beacons at 6th Street Sharrows and signage Unit Cost 15,000/ mi. 50,000 ea 300,000/ mi 7,500/mi 7,500/mi 15,000/mi 20,000 Cost 5,000 50,000 51,000 4,050 1,500 3,450 30,000 Comments
Willow Park, 6th and College to 4th and Willow Elmwood Avenue, Willow to 1st total Link Link 22 Link Van Buren, 1st to 8th 19th Street, Jewell to Randolph 11th Street, Randolph to Western; Western, 11th to Topeka High Western, 11th to 8th total
.08
300,000/mi, 30,000 for crossing
54,000
.32 3.37 .72 .37 1.40 .20 2.69
7,500
2,400 201,400
Bike lanes with installation of back-in diagonal parking Sharrows with signage First stage bicycle boulevard with sharrows and identification Sharrows and signage
25,000/mi 7,500/mi 15,000/mi 7,500
18,000 6th to 8th Street portion is part of Route 1 2,775 21,000 1,500 57,275
192

Route Trail Segment Deer Creek/Dornwood, 10th to 29th Length Bikeway Facility Treatment (Miles) 2.50 10 foot concrete trail Unit Cost Cost Comments Does not include cost of new or adapted Wittenberg Road Bridge over Kansas Turnpike. Short term use of sharrows or advisory bike lane on existing bridge. Route uses Oak Parkway and parallels Shunga Creek trib under Interstate 385,000/ $962,500 mi
Trail
Wood Valley Connector, 37th and Randolph to 37th and Wood Valley total
.25 2.75
10 foot concrete path
385,000/ 96,250 mi. 1,058,750
recap of pilot system by route

Route 1 2 3 4 8 14 17 21 23 Links Trail Trail Name East-West Randolph West 25th Belle Clay/East 25th Golden 33rd Street College North Topeka 11th, 19th, Van Buren Deer Creek/Dornwood Wood Valley Connector Length (Miles) 6.22 4.56 1.78 3.07 6.08 1.84 3.37 3.37 2.43 2.69 2.50 .25 Cost 423,025 239,700 26,700 100,600 143,950 147,300 73,400 201,400 41,450 57,275 962,500 96,250
recap of pilot system by infrastructure type

Infrastructure Type Street Adaptation* Route-Related Pathways Trails Length (Miles) 29.92 2.73 1.78 Cost 631,725 842,275 1,058,750
total
34.43
2,532,750
* Intersection improvements are calculated as street adaptations
total
complete pilot system with trails
34.79
2,513,550
193
194
6 | SUPPORT SYSTEMS
CHAPTER
sUpport systems
195
hile previous chapters have focused on the design and character of a bikeways network, infrastructure by itself does not create an excellent bicycle transportation program. to guide communities, the league of american bicyclists through its bicycle friendly communities (BFC) program, establishes five components of program design that are used to determine whether a city should be awarded bfc status the 5 es of engineering, education, encouragement, enforcement, and evaluation.
According to the LAB, the evaluative elements of the 5Es are: enGineerinG evaluating what is on the ground and has been built to promote cycling in the community. Areas of evaluation include: Existence and content of a bicycle master plan. Accommodation of cyclists on public roads. Presence of both well-designed bike lanes and multiuse paths in the community. Availability of secure bike parking. Condition and connectivity of both the off-road and on-road network.
enCoUraGement concentrating on promotion and encouragement of bicycling. Areas of evaluation include: Programming such as Bike Month and Bike to Work Week events. Community bike maps and route finding signage. Community bike rides and commuter incentive programs. Safe Routes to School programs. Promotion of cycling or a cycling culture through offroad facilities, BMX parks, velodromes, and road and mountain bicycling clubs.
EDuCATION determining the amount of education available for both cyclists and motorists. Education includes: Community programs teaching cyclists of all ages how to ride safely in any area from multi-use paths to congested city streets. Education for motorists on how to share the road safely with cyclists. Availability of cycling education for adults and children. Number of League Cycling Instructors in the community, Distribution of safety information is distributed to both cyclists and motorists in the community such as bike maps, tip sheets, and as a part of drivers education manuals and courses.
enForCement addressing connections between the cycling and law enforcement communities, addressing: Liaisons between the law enforcement and cycling communities. Presence of bicycle divisions of the law enforcement or public safety communities Targeted enforcement to encourage cyclists and motorists to share the road safely Existence of bicycling related laws such as those requiring helmet or the use of sidepaths.
eValUation & planninG, considering programs in place to evaluate current programs and plan for the future, including: Measuring the amount of cycling taking place in the community Tabulation of crash and fatality rates, and ways that the community works to improve these numbers.
196
6 | SUPPORT SYSTEMS
Presence, updating, and implementation of a bicycle plan, and next steps for improvement.
Most of this plan addresses the Engineering aspect of bicycle programming. But the soft systems, namely the other four Es, are critical to taking full advantage of infrastructure investments, improving the effectiveness and safety of bicyclist, and making Topeka a truly bicycle friendly community. The following discussion provides recommendations for the support systems for bicycling in the city, organized around the LABs five categories of bicycle friendliness.
sends the message that the committee is taken seriously and its interests are a recognized part of the citys transportation picture. a bicycle/pedestrian coordinator. This position provides a consistent presence within city government for bicycle and pedestrian initiatives. Typically, the coordinator staffs the advisory committee, is critically involved in implementation and technical design of components of this plan, initiates and prepares grant applications, works with civic and private sector groups on programs, reviews development applications and project and for access, and generally becomes the public face for active transportation in the city. This position may be assigned to an existing staff member, but this may be a convenient and relatively low-cost short term arrangement. However, the most effective coordinators devote full-time attention to pedestrian and bicycle transportation and builds functional partnerships with departments and agencies that touch this vital area. These departments include Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Planning, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Kansas Department of Transportation, and private organizations. In many cases, funding for a bicycle/pedestrian coordinator comes in whole ad in part from outside city government. For example, in Omaha, funding for the position is largely shared by a major health care provider and the MPO. This funding is provided on a three-year basis, after which is effectiveness will be evaluated, and at least a portion of funding will transition to the city. a bicycle transportation advocacy organization. An advocacy organization dedicated to bicycle transportation can be extremely important in coordinating specific programs such as education efforts, insti-
organizational infrastructure
A truly successful bicycle transportation program will require an organizational infrastructure that will grow over time. This framework must do several things, including advise decision makers in and out of city government, organize programs, advocate for pedestrian and bicycle interests, market educational efforts, and serve as a central point of communication for the bicycling community. It should include the following components: a bicycle/pedestrian advisory committee (bpaC). This committee will initially act as a link between the active transportation community and city government, with a scope that includes review of transportation and other city projects that affect or address bicycle/pedestrian access, identifying and addressing problems, advising city staff on specific issues, and assisting with public and private implementation of this plan. Other responsibilities are likely to emerge over time, potentially including such areas as legislation, technical planning, and educational programs. A BPAC should be formally established in city government by executive order or city council resolution to give it somewhat permanent status, and should meet on a regular (preferably monthly) basis. Formal status
197
tutions such as bicycle cooperatives, special events, communications, and other actions in behalf of active transportation. These groups evolve and take different forms in different cities, often emerging as a partnership of other groups and clubs. Topeka already has some of the elements of such an organization. The Kaw Valley Bicycle Club represents bicycle interests, but like many clubs, concentrates on events and group rides. Bike Topeka complements the club by providing information and communication through its website. Other logical partners include health providers, safety organizations and councils, and similar nest groups. In some cities, groups develop under the leadership of active living organizations.
integrate bicycle rules of the road into drivers education programs. Most drivers are unaware of the rights and responsibilities of vulnerable users such as bicyclists (as well as motorcyclists and pedestrians. These factors should be included in drivers education programs for new motorists and decertification testing. In addition, a significant unit on bicycle, pedestrian, and motorcycle laws and behaviors should be included in defensive driving classes for drives who have received citations for moving traffic violations. This often reaches motorists who may be most likely to drive inattentively or aggressively, and may be most likely to endanger cyclists. work with major employers to conduct on-site education programs. As part of efforts to encourage better employee health through greater active transportation, major employers often are willing to host bikeEd programs. Outreach and partnerships with companies to offer programs on-site can increase participation in bicycling, and assist employers with establishing an ethos based on healthy living. Develop and implement bicycle education programs for kids. Young bicyclists perceive the riding environment differently from adults, and obviously have neither the visual perspective nor experiences of older riders. Schools and safety groups often offer bike rodeos which may or may not address the skills of riding even on local streets. The LABs BikeEd program has a specific track that addresses these issues ad skills, and they should be incorporated into these more frequently offered safety events. publish and post on-line an engaging and brief guide to safe bicycling. Information on safe urban cycling should be both ubiquitous and appealing to different audiences, including both motors and bicyclists. Poor safety practices are both dangerous and bad for public relations, creating the possibility of backlash against cyclists. New Yorks Biking Rules program, an on-line guide to practice and law
education
increase the number of league certified instructors in topeka. The League of American bicyclists BikeEd program is recognized a the standard for bicycle safety education, and includes a variety of courses that serve young cyclists, recreational riders, and everyone up to road-hardened commuters. Successful operation of the program is dependent on one critical factor, however - local presence of instructors. Therefore, a critical part of the program is training of instructors through the League Certification process. In this process, cyclists complete both prerequisite courses and a three-day course conducted by a specially trained instructor. Successful completion and passing written and on-road evaluations qualifies individuals as League Certified Instructors (LCI), who are then authorized to provide training to other cyclists. As of 2011, Topeka has only one certified instructor and certainly has a need for more. In addition to a cadre of instructors, a successful training program requires marketing and placement to match instructors with demand from schools, corporations, and other organizations. This can most appropriately be done through an advocacy or active living organization with staff to organize the education effort.
biking rules. Excerpts from a streetcode to promote responsible urban cycling, developed by New York Citys Transportation Alternatives advocacy organization.
198
6 | SUPPORT SYSTEMS
developed by the advocacy organization Transportation Alternatives, and a brief city DOT publication on safe riding are excellent examples. Chicago has published a safety booklet specifically targeted toward young cyclists. Topeka should develop similar guides, which also successfully avoid portraying bicycling as a hazardous activity.
more people. implement a bicycle ambassador program in middle and high schools. Ambassadors are students with a special interest in bicycling who share that interest with their peers. Many cities also have adult ambassador programs, whose goal to to provide safety education and market the many positive aspects of bicycling in the city. publish and maintain a topeka bicycle map. The initial bicycle map is based on research and surveying completed for this plan. It categorizes streets based primarily on the quality of their bicycling environment, using such criteria as continuity, traffic volume, width, and service to destinations. It also illustrates existing trails and their interaction with the street system. This map should be published and distributed through bike stores, educational programs, employers, and community agencies and facilities. The street map may be merged with the citys present trails map, but may also be a separate document because the two publications serve somewhat different publics. The map should also be posted on-line and paired with a blog or interactive website that invites comments and suggestions. The map should be updated periodically (typically every two years) to reflect new recommendations, public input, new construction, and network progress. A specific organization should be assigned responsibility for map maintenance. Candidates include the City, the MPO, or a local bicycle coalition or organization. apply the portland model of focus on increasing bicycling on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis. Portland, arguably the nations leading large city for bike transportation, concentrates on specific neighborhood districts for a period of time to increase participation. It uses a variety of tools, including surveys, events, education, and other programming before moving on to another district. Topeka should experiment with this approach on a pilot basis and evaluate is effectiveness.
encouragement
expand participation in bicycle transportation through programs that engage corporations in competitions and fun, such as corporate commuter challenges. These programs track participation by numb of trips and miles traveled during a multiple-month period, and give awards to winners at an event at the end of the period. Companies may be classified by size, so that competition is among similarly sized organizations. These challenge programs are successful by encouraging bicycle transportation within companies and in many case produce a bicycle culture as companies compete against each other. institute a bike month celebration. Bike month events typically occur during May, and can involve a variety of activities, including short rides led by the mayor or other public officials, clinics on subjects such as riding technique and bicycle repair, special tour events, screenings of bicycle-related movies, and other programs. organize special rides that are within the capabilities of a broad range of riders and encourage family participation. On memorial day weekend, the Active Transportation Alliances Bike the Drive closes Chicagos Lake Shore Drive for exclusive bicycle use for three hours on Sunday morning for cyclists to enjoy. In Madison, seven miles of downtown streets are closed to motor traffic for exclusive use by bicycles and pedestrians in a free event that attracts thousands. Many community rides and benefits have different lengths and routes to appeal to all ages. These events build interest, and make cycling comfortable and attractive to
encouragement through events. The largest group bike ride in the country is Bike New Yorks Five Borough Bike Tour, with 32,000 riders. But much more modest rides also provide fun and support for riders of all abilities.
199
encourage topeka businesses to participate in the league of american bicyclists bicycle Friendly business (bFb) program. The program recognizes businesses that encourage their employees to use bicycles for transportation through efforts such as providing secure bicycle parking, sponsoring company rides, offering economic incentives, establishing internal bicycling events and bicycle interest groups, and supporting community bicycle initiatives. As of 2011, Kansas has only one BFB, located in Overland Park. achieve bicycle Friendly Community status within three to five years. In addition to recognition as a good bicycling environment, many observers also consider Bicycle Friendly Community status to be an indicator of overall community quality. As such, it is a significant community marketing tool, and reinforces substantial efforts in balanced transportation development.
- Neighborhood commercial centers and districts. - Museums and attractions. - Employment concentrations. - Parking structures. One stall in a public parking structure can be devoted to bicycle parking, and can accommodate as many as 12 inverted u-racks, serving up to 24 bicycles. Unused space such as corners where parking stalls change orientation can also be easily used for bicycle parking. - Diagonal stalls in business districts. In areas with heavy demand, one stall can also accommodate up to 24 bicycles in a bike corral. standardizing on bike parking equipment that is durable, relatively inexpensive, and unobtrusive. Many of the bike racks in use today, including the so-called schoolyard rack and waves are inefficient, take up a great deal of space, and, in the case of the former, can actually damage bikes. Better in most cases are less obtrusive designs such as the inverted U, hitching post, or the new theta design that recently won a bicycle parking design competition for New York City. Develop a funding mechanism and incentive program for bicycle parking installations. The City of Topeka may provide a small allocation for installing facilities at public destination. Bike parking on private property may be funded with the assistance of special events. For example, Omahas Eastern Nebraska Trails Network holds an annual Corporate Challenge ride, which in 2011 attracted a record 4,200 cyclists. A portion of the proceeds are used to purchase inverted Us, some of which are offered to targeted private businesses at reduced cost.
engineering (Facilities)
institute a bicycle parking program, installing facilities at strategic locations across the city. Bicycle parking is a low cost but significant physical improvement that both encourages cycling, provides greater security, and keeps bikes from damaging trees or street furniture, or obstructing pedestrians. The parking program includes several elements: identifying key locations for facilities. Examples of priority locations include: - Major public facilities such as government buildings, the public library, community centers, parks and recreational destinations, the zoo, and the Discovery Center. - Locations near trails that offer support services such as restrooms, food, and water.
200
6 | SUPPORT SYSTEMS
amend zoning ordinances to require a specific amount of bicycle parking for high demand business types.
Develop and install a unified bikeway network graphic system. While signs and sign clutter should always be minimized, a carefully designed identification and directional graphics system can greatly increase users comfort and ease of navigating the street system. The graphic system may have individual features, but should generally follow the guidelines of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Types of signs in the system include: Route identifier, including a system logo and the number and name of the route. These signs reassure users that they are on the right path and is keyed to numbered routes. Intersection signs, indicating the intersection of two or more routes. Destination way finders, indicating the direction, distance, and time (using a standard speed, typically 9 miles per hour), to destinations along the route. Directional changes, signaling turns along a route.
EAST-WEST ROUTE
bicycle parking. Inverted Us at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, enhanced with the schools mascot.
The graphic system should be modular to provide maximum flexibility and efficiency in fabrication. Signs should also use reflective material for night visibility. The Clearview font is recommended as a standard for text. establish a bike station in downtown topeka. Bike stations are increasing in popularity in cities, and offer commuters secure daytime parking, light repairs and maintenance, and possible support facilities such as showers and restrooms. Some stations also include retail items and bike rentals. While a station may be well into the future, downtowns high office employment concentration may make such a facility especially appealing.
bikeways system graphics. Clockwise from bottom: Destination sign, route intersection sign, and route identifier. Right: Concept applied to a Topeka system, using Kaw Valley Bicycle Club logo as a system mark.
Gage Park
1 2
201
Shunga Trail
institute a bike share system. The clustering of destinations in central Topeka, including city and state government offices, Washburn University, the library, hospitals, the ExpoCentre, and other facilities within a two mile radius create an excellent bike share environment. These programs locate special bicycles at strategically located stations, released by credit cards or passes. Bicycles can be returned to any station in the system. These systems can be used by auto and transit commuters, visitors, and others looking for a quick method of moving around the city center. They are often funded by a consortium of sponsors and may be operated and maintained by the supplying vendor, bicycle shops, or an operating organization.
enforcement
Involve a Police Department representative on the advisory committee, bike education efforts, and other aspects of the bicycle transportation program. Police participation adds a critical perspective to facility and safety program planning and implementation. Enforce bicycle laws for both motorists and bicyclists. All users of the road have responsibilities to each other. Effective enforcement begins with police officers being completely familiar with legal rights and responsibilities of cyclists. But bicyclists must not have free passes to disobey traffic laws, and irresponsible riders often create backlash against all. Enforcement for all users leads to better, safer behavior and greater predictability and cooperation by all.
evaluation and planning

institute an evaluation system that compiles bicycle traffic counts and crash information, and monitors mode split data through the american Community survey and user surveys. Good evaluation information measures the effectiveness of the program and informs adjustments and improvements. The bicycle/pedestrian coordinator is ultimately responsible for developing and implementing this evaluative program.
bike stations in different settings. From top: Minneapolis Midtown Greenway; Berkeley (CA) BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit Station; Chicagos Millennium Park.
Complete periodic surveys of system users, monitoring customer satisfaction and recommendations. The very high response to the survey in chapter two indicates a large and committed constituency that is a great source of information and input. In addition to being an excellent measure of user satisfaction and recommendations for improvement, surveys keep the bicycle community actively engaged in the process of improving bicycle transportation in Topeka.
bike share system in Washington, d.c.
202
6 | SUPPORT SYSTEMS
logo of topekas kaw valley bicycle club
203

Topeka Bikeways Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Topeka Bikeways Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

bikeways

metropolian topeka planning organization policy board

metropolian topeka planning organization/ City planning staff

project advisory Committee

metropolian topeka planning organization technical advisory Committee

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

plan methodology and stakeholder involvement

organization of the plan

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

topekas biCyClinG enVironment

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

geography and topography (figure 1.1)

1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT

Geography and topography

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

land use and development patterns (figure 1.2)

1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

y Council Approved February 24, 2004

ebruary 24, 2004

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

destinations (figure 1.3)

1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

existing bikeway facilities (figure 1.4)

1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT

existing bikeway Facilities

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

street connectivity and types (figures 1.5,1.6)

Figure 1.6 identifies street types and configurations within

1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

Continuous length (miles) 0.5-1.0 1.5

examples 15th St.

2.0 miles and over 1.0-2.0

Mixed Use Arterial Mixed Use Boulevard

Urban One-Way Pairs

Downtown MultiLane Downtown Main Street

Downtown Topeka Downtown settings

Jackson St 7th St Kansas Ave North Kansas Ave

1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

other network opportunities (figure 1.7)

1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

summary of existing bicycling conditions and opportunities (figure 1.8)

1 | TOPEK A S BICYCLING ENVIRONMENT

existing bicycle Conditions

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

the market For biCyClinG in topeka

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

alternative possible demand

existing pedestrian and bicycle demand

2 | THE MARKET FOR BICYCLING IN TOPEK A

Figure 2.1: existing pedestrian trips, topeka

total daily pedestrian trips

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN

total daily bike trips

2 | THE MARKET FOR BICYCLING IN TOPEK A

2030 potential demand

total daily pedestrian trips

TOPEKA BIKEWAYS MASTER PLAN